Page 79 of 79 FirstFirst ... 2969777879
Results 3,121 to 3,154 of 3154

Thread: Other than Bioshock

  1. #3121
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    2

    spec ops the line

    I'm playing spec ops the line (a very beautiful game) however there are tactical problems playing it above all in FUBAR way where every movement and decision are important. So the problems concern the phase where the character has to run near the wounded mate and the enemies are firing: the character cures the mate instead to run, suffering the blows of enemies which kill it. Is it possible to divide the cure function from the run function assigning it eventually to R letter!? Another question: is there a possibility to assign physx operation to physx card? (there is no graphical option concerning the panel of the game: currently I have an ageia physx card. I've the fubar version DVD, are there patches or upgrades for the game? thanks

  2. #3122
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,058
    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    Depends. I think some were weaker than others (the returning Varric didn't really add anything and Vivienne could have used more depth) but most of them were good. The banter between them is certainly entertaining by itself. They just didn't have as much screentime yet as Morrigan or Leliana did who will be slowly phasing out at this point to give way for the new returners like Solas.
    You seem to remember Inquisition very well (at least much better than me). Did you replay it that much? I don't think I replayed it more than 1 or 2 times. I don't think I've touched it since 2014.

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    Yeah. The time it is set in provided a better opportunity for that. After all, it's easier and more involving to actually show teleporting waiters just doing their job than listening to some rant about it in the umpteenth audio diary.
    So do you think BioShock 1 could have been a better game if it was set when Rapture was still alive? I get that it would be more involving but it won't have the same aura that a dead city can provide.

    Also how much do you like the story of BioShock 1 and Infinite compared to other games? The reason that I'm asking is because you said in one of your previous posts that you disliked the unreliable narrator but both BioShock 1 and Infinite have unreliable narrators. Did that diminish your appreciation of their stories?

    TBH I've noticed that a lot of video games use the unreliable narrator technique. I wonder why? Even Knight of the Old Republic had an unreliable narrator didn't it?

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    I suppose the same reason I do. The characters are enclosed into a tight space and no one - including our detective - is really safe, which makes things more exciting. The solution is complex enough, yet not so convoluted. The ending is also one of Poirot's more humane moments, where he lets the busted couple keep a hidden second pistol they could commit suicide with despite knowing about it.
    The only convoluted thing I found in Death in the Nile was how the murdered lady's maid was willing to keep quiet about the murderer in exchange for a financial bribe. I find some characters in Christie's books to be too desperate for money. I mean if you're a maid and you've been working for your mistress for years, would you really keep quiet about who murdered her just because the murderer gave you money? Murder is a serious thing. I don't think everyone can just keep quiet about it even if they were paid.

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    No, I think they built up tension really well. It's a bit of a stretch that a single old man could execute this labirynthine scheme so flawlessly and so stealthily, but it doesn't go beyond the usual exaggerations of the genre.
    I think the biggest exaggeration in the genre is how every murderer is such a good actor and can keep such a straight face.

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    I think the Judge character is better in this aspect than most. His motives were not material or even vengeful. He's a vigilante with a questionable sense of morality and perfect kill score, plus he never gets caught or even suspected. Unusual for a Christie novel.
    Have you read any other detective stories other than the ones that Christie wrote? If not have you watched any detective shows?

    Recently I've been reading J.K. Rowling's Cormoran Strike series. It does nothing new but it's enjoyable. It's also more mature than her Harry Potter books. I think you didn't like Harry Potter but you might like Cormoran Strike instead. It's getting it's own BBC series later this year.

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    It was written on the backside of that old copy I have, though I guess it could be just some white lie to boost sales. That it was the most challenging to write is also on the novel's wiki page.
    Didn't you say you had the first edition of that book which had the now-considered racist title? If so then maybe what's written in your copy is true. Maybe 'And then there were none' was Christie's favourite book to write at the time that she wrote it but later she changed her mind (Christie wrote Crooked House and ordeal of Innocence) later in her life.

    Also have you read any other of Christie's non-Poirot books?

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    Yeah, mostly the stage plays, but it was with Christie's consent. Together with the directors they decided that the original ending was too grim for the audiences at the time so Christie wrote the happy ending as an alternative one for better hopes of success with theater goers. I've seen plays of both versions but I prefer the original. From the movies I've seen the American one from the 70s and the new BBC one (which I think was a bit empty with some weird green-ish filter over the whole movie), but I personally think this piece just suits theater better. Most of the tension is lost in those fixed camera angles.
    Do you still go to the theater nowadays? What advantages do you think theater has over the cinema? I think ever since cinemas were created, theaters lost a lot of their audience to them.

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    She cries because she's already certain that Nate lied to her. She suspected it before but at that point she probably succeeded in tracking him and she's booking that flight to Madagascar. I don't think there's anything more to that, Naughty Dog's target audience is not much for subtlety, I don't see why they would load that many layers to one segment but not others.
    Well I think Naughty Dog has always added subtlety to certain aspects of Uncharted. Like I think they've always been careful to depict Nate's abandonment issues in every game.

    Amy Henning talked about them in the Behind the Scenes of Uncharted 3:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfvV...D078B6#t=8m27s

    Notice how she says 'I've always percieved Drake as someone with issues of loss and abandonment.' That suggests to me that she tried to depict these issues in the first 2 games as well.

    Also what do you think Hennig means when she says 'When things get too real, he (Drake) might make himself scarce'?

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    I think Sully was the one guy who actually acted like himself. Nate is basically his surrogate son, of course he's worried about him being in bad company, especially if it's someone like himself. He's like a overprotective dad with a teenage daughter before prom, Nate's gender is irrelevant in this case.
    I was more referring to how Nate and Sam were talking about Sully when they were outside that auction mansion and were planning on scaling the walls to break in:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_rOeDXkdDCQ&t=1h16m20s

    Remember that initially Sam was reluctant to trust Sully but Nate said that he can trust Sully even though him and Sully never saw eye to eye. Then Sam calls it the understatement of the year.

    All this implies is that Sam and Sully never really liked each other and that explains why Nate wasn't around Sam in the prequel comics etc. Nate was with Sully and Sully didn't like Sam so Nate had to take turns hanging around with Sully and Sam.

    The thing is I don't really understand why Sam and Sully would have such big differences. They're similar enough in character from what I can tell.

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    I just finished Horizon Zero Dawn and I must say it came as a big surprise. I expected some dumb monster hunting sandbox but there's much more to it than that. The world and story are surprisingly imaginitive and deep, the protagonist and side characters are likeable and the gameplay very fun. It does nothing innovative, but what it borrows from a bunch of other successful games work together well enough to present this setting. The side quests are not quite as complex as in The Witcher but they're definitely going in the right direction, and it does have a stronger central plot that is cleverly paced to keep the player intrigued. There's both a setting-related and a personal thread, and while individual elements of this story must have been done in other fiction before, I was moved. I've seen some reviews that said the story was too "video-gamey" or "thin" but I think those people either rushed through it or just didn't care to look. The writers really did their best with what must have originally been some sketch by an 8-year-old with robot dinos and cavemen.

    It's funny that what I expected to have with Andromeda I got from a completely different game instead. Not that I mind, I think this will be a great new franchise to keep an eye out for. If the sequel could be a full fledged RPG (this first game doesn't have a choice system) it'd be perfection.
    How strong does Horizon Zero Dawn stand up as a character driven story? IMO games can do character driven stories the best out of any medium, even better than movies. I think the biggest shortcoming of movies is that they're too short (about 2 hours or so) so they can't really explore characters in as much detail as they would ideally want to. However games don't have that disadvantage. I always find my favourite video game stories to be character driven rather than plot driven.

    Also have you seen the new trailer for Uncharted Lost Legacy:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6IOOWnOXlw

    I think it looks promising but I think it's weird how they seem to have turned Chloe into Nate. I guess they needed someone to provide historical exposition and they decided that Chloe was the best choice for the task. Even if they go down that route, I'd prefer if they had Chloe make mistakes with her historical knowledge every now and then. I don't think it makes sense for her to be anywhere near as good as Nate in history regardless of who her father was.

    I also have trouble buying Chloe's father being a Hindu historian or whatever he's supposed to be. Judging by Chloe's character, I always saw her father being some playboy who went around seducing various women.

    Also have you tried Assassin's Creed Syndicate? I got into it recently. I used to be a big fan of Assassin's Creed when the franchise started but gradually grew out of it as it became a dull COD-like yearly series. While the gameplay in Syndicate is nothing special the story is enjoyable. I haven't enjoyed an Assassin's Creed story ever since Revelations. I just thought all the characters after Ezio sucked. However the two playable assassins in Syndicate are a brother-sister duo (not something you see often in games) and are fairly likeable characters.

  3. #3123
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    A lighthouse in Budapest
    Posts
    2,286
    Quote Originally Posted by TSCR View Post
    You seem to remember Inquisition very well (at least much better than me). Did you replay it that much? I don't think I replayed it more than 1 or 2 times. I don't think I've touched it since 2014.
    I did a second playthrough sometime last year, but I don't plan to do any more. It's an okay entry, but I certainly won't replay it as many times as I did Origins. Plus I got The World of Thedas lore book which is a pretty exhaustive encyclopedia.

    So do you think BioShock 1 could have been a better game if it was set when Rapture was still alive? I get that it would be more involving but it won't have the same aura that a dead city can provide.
    No, I think BioShock 1 is good as it is. But you either have a dead city or a living city, and audio diaries were the closest thing to help the player understand Rapture's workings in that sort of setting. Which as far as exposition goes is just not optimal, but rather a necessary disadvantage that Burial at Sea didn't have to be concerned with.

    Also how much do you like the story of BioShock 1 and Infinite compared to other games? The reason that I'm asking is because you said in one of your previous posts that you disliked the unreliable narrator but both BioShock 1 and Infinite have unreliable narrators. Did that diminish your appreciation of their stories?
    I think an unreliable narrator is a lot harder to detect or even define in a visual medium such as video games. There's no one telling the story, because you are experiencing it yourself. I mean, does either Ryan or Atlas really count as a narrator? They're not telling the story, you experience it through Jack who is misled but not unreliable. A movie or a novel are capable of narrowing your perspective to a degree that a video game can't. None of your experiences in Rapture were distorted or unreal (not even the ADAM ghosts), it all happened as we saw it. A twist in the story doesn't equal an unreliable narrator, imo.

    I guess Booker would be closer to being one, but again, he's not telling the story and doesn't have the intention to conceal anything he knows or finds important to mention to the player. Same as Jack or Revan from KotOR, he isn't lying or is mentally ill, he just doesn't possess all the info and gets tricked by others as a result. A "clueless narrator" would be a more fitting term I think.

    An actual unrealiable protagonist I know of in gaming is Walker from Spec Ops: The Line, and I did like that game. Silent Hill 2 also has one, though I never played it myself. Maybe it's because of the different medium but if a novel pulled the same thing as the game did I wouldn't have liked it as much. Visuals are just more powerful and versatile. A director of a game needs to put a lot more effort into a scenery like that for the player to not suspect anything. When an author is throwing you off with misleading descriptions, it just feels cheap to me.

    As to why it's popular, well I guess it's the easiest route for a narrative game that wants to have a twist in the story. A protagonist that knows everything and is in complete control at all times just doesn't work for that kind of storytelling. Amnesia/memory wipe is a very common trope. Maybe the writers of future games will get a bit more imaginative. Spec Ops cleverly used mental illness (severe PTSD) for example.

    The only convoluted thing I found in Death in the Nile was how the murdered lady's maid was willing to keep quiet about the murderer in exchange for a financial bribe. I find some characters in Christie's books to be too desperate for money. I mean if you're a maid and you've been working for your mistress for years, would you really keep quiet about who murdered her just because the murderer gave you money? Murder is a serious thing. I don't think everyone can just keep quiet about it even if they were paid.
    I think they can. No one said the maid and her mistress were friends, as far as I remember. She could have been a horrible boss for all we know and maids were never rich.

    I think the biggest exaggeration in the genre is how every murderer is such a good actor and can keep such a straight face.
    Definitely agree on that.

    Have you read any other detective stories other than the ones that Christie wrote? If not have you watched any detective shows?
    I read Sherlock Holmes' The Hound of Baskerville and saw the movie as well (the one with Peter Cushing). The story was good but I wasn't hooked on the characters. After that I haven't really looked and just sticked to general crime/mystery stories without a detective, like Alfred Hitchcock's collections. I might try Rowling's series when I have time.

    Didn't you say you had the first edition of that book which had the now-considered racist title? If so then maybe what's written in your copy is true. Maybe 'And then there were none' was Christie's favourite book to write at the time that she wrote it but later she changed her mind (Christie wrote Crooked House and ordeal of Innocence) later in her life.
    It isn't first edition, just a really old one from the 70s. The title of this piece didn't actually change here until very recently due to Western influence, as the N-word isn't considered offensive, it just means "black person" and nothing more (there are no actual black people around who would object either). In theater they still promote it as New Title/Old Title, so it would be recognizable.

    Also have you read any other of Christie's non-Poirot books?
    I read a few. Why Didn't They ask Evans? started out as interesting but ended up being too convoluted, but The Sittaford Mystery has a similar feel as the Hound of Baskerville, so I liked that one as well. I'll eventually read further ones.

    Do you still go to the theater nowadays? What advantages do you think theater has over the cinema? I think ever since cinemas were created, theaters lost a lot of their audience to them.
    I go once or twice a year, and choose mostly comedies. I think that's a genre that definitely works better in theater. The viewer feels closer to the story, almost involved in it, especially when the actors purposefully involve them either in a staged or a spontaneous way. A movie can't do that. Having the protagonist talk to a camera in a distant point in time versus having him walk right near you in real time are completely different experiences.

    I don't feel like cinemas siphoned people away from theater, they don't offer the same thing. Though it's true that the legacy nations of the Austrian Empire have a strong theater culture that not even the commies could kill, it might not be the case elsewhere. Traditional plays, operas and operettes continue to be popular, and it's not uncommon for companies or schools to hand out season passes at a discount with little to no tax, endorsed by the state. It also helps that especially in Budapest there's an abundance of recognizable A-lister actors/celebrities regularly playing in theaters while the tickets remain affordable for anyone.

    Well I think Naughty Dog has always added subtlety to certain aspects of Uncharted. Like I think they've always been careful to depict Nate's abandonment issues in every game.

    Amy Henning talked about them in the Behind the Scenes of Uncharted 3:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfvV...D078B6#t=8m27s

    Notice how she says 'I've always percieved Drake as someone with issues of loss and abandonment.' That suggests to me that she tried to depict these issues in the first 2 games as well.
    Well, she might have gone a bit too subtle on that one, because other than his obsession about his Drake heritage nothing else suggested that to me until the 3rd game. And then 4 went overboard.

    Also what do you think Hennig means when she says 'When things get too real, he (Drake) might make himself scarce'?
    It might be my English failing me but I have no idea. Isn't the word "scarce" usually used with objects in insufficient quantity?

    I was more referring to how Nate and Sam were talking about Sully when they were outside that auction mansion and were planning on scaling the walls to break in:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_rOeDXkdDCQ&t=1h16m20s

    Remember that initially Sam was reluctant to trust Sully but Nate said that he can trust Sully even though him and Sully never saw eye to eye. Then Sam calls it the understatement of the year.

    All this implies is that Sam and Sully never really liked each other and that explains why Nate wasn't around Sam in the prequel comics etc. Nate was with Sully and Sully didn't like Sam so Nate had to take turns hanging around with Sully and Sam.

    The thing is I don't really understand why Sam and Sully would have such big differences. They're similar enough in character from what I can tell.
    Distrust between scoundrels, no honor among thieves and all. It also plays a part that Sam wants to reduce the chances of his charade's exposure and he knows that Sully is a perceptive guy without bias towards him, so rousing Nate against him is logical. Meanwhile Sully is actually justified about his own trust issues towards Sam, while Sam's prove to be unfounded. They might share a few traits, but they are not the same.

    How strong does Horizon Zero Dawn stand up as a character driven story? IMO games can do character driven stories the best out of any medium, even better than movies. I think the biggest shortcoming of movies is that they're too short (about 2 hours or so) so they can't really explore characters in as much detail as they would ideally want to. However games don't have that disadvantage. I always find my favourite video game stories to be character driven rather than plot driven.
    I'd say it's world-driven first, character-driven second. The very first question that pops up in the player's mind at the start is most probably "What the heck happened here?", and a bit later "What's the deal with this person?" comes to the forefront as well. It's no big spoiler that the two are directly connected and both mysteries unfold together through the main plot. It does take its time as the suspense stretches on. While it's not completely free of clichés, I think it was done very well. As per video game trope, the protagonist is the single most important being in the game's world, but it has a believable and well-explained reason behind it which I like a lot. It never felt forced.

    Aloy's personality is a bit undefined, but she's a 19-year-old with a constant identity crisis, a "bit undefined" is what she's supposed to be so I'm fine with that. She does get a bit deeper mid-game onward. Her arc is interesting nevertheless and leaves a lot of room for sequels. The subtle ending was perfect for the game's tone as well as for that arc. I can imagine the developers doing a similar approach with her in the future as The Witcher had with Geralt, where you can make choices but can't affect her core personality. I haven't been this excited for a faraway sequel in quite some time.

    Also have you seen the new trailer for Uncharted Lost Legacy:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6IOOWnOXlw

    I think it looks promising but I think it's weird how they seem to have turned Chloe into Nate. I guess they needed someone to provide historical exposition and they decided that Chloe was the best choice for the task. Even if they go down that route, I'd prefer if they had Chloe make mistakes with her historical knowledge every now and then. I don't think it makes sense for her to be anywhere near as good as Nate in history regardless of who her father was.

    I also have trouble buying Chloe's father being a Hindu historian or whatever he's supposed to be. Judging by Chloe's character, I always saw her father being some playboy who went around seducing various women.
    Yeah, looks like another convenient character retcon. I also feel it's unnecessary. This story could be funnier and more of its own thing if these two clueless opportunists would stumble all the way with ignorant luck and a lot of failures. But U4's all-serious approach is the new standard, so it is how it is. We'll see how it turns out.

    Also have you tried Assassin's Creed Syndicate? I got into it recently. I used to be a big fan of Assassin's Creed when the franchise started but gradually grew out of it as it became a dull COD-like yearly series. While the gameplay in Syndicate is nothing special the story is enjoyable. I haven't enjoyed an Assassin's Creed story ever since Revelations. I just thought all the characters after Ezio sucked. However the two playable assassins in Syndicate are a brother-sister duo (not something you see often in games) and are fairly likeable characters.
    I played every AC until Unity and took a break recently. It does get tired after this many entries already. I'm in the minority who didn't like Ezio that much (I think AC Rogue's Shay was the most interesting so far), the first game is still my favorite. I saw some footage of the twins from Syndicate and they do seem fun, but Victorian London is boring as hell so I'll probably play it sometime later.
    Last edited by biccs_pudding; 05-11-2017 at 12:37 PM.

  4. #3124
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,058
    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    I did a second playthrough sometime last year, but I don't plan to do any more. It's an okay entry, but I certainly won't replay it as many times as I did Origins. Plus I got The World of Thedas lore book which is a pretty exhaustive encyclopedia.
    What do you think of Dragon Age 2 compared to Origins and Inquisition? I think it's story is decent but it's world not so much.I don't find that city (forgot its name) they were in to be a particularly memorable location.

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    No, I think BioShock 1 is good as it is. But you either have a dead city or a living city, and audio diaries were the closest thing to help the player understand Rapture's workings in that sort of setting. Which as far as exposition goes is just not optimal, but rather a necessary disadvantage that Burial at Sea didn't have to be concerned with.
    Were audio diaries the best that they could so with BioShock 1 though? Audio diaries as a narrative device were used a lot in old school CRPGs which I think made sense because those games were made on a small budget. However nowadays, games have a much bigger budget.

    I think it would have been better if games nowadays used video diaries or something to that effect. Watching a video of someone talking would be more involving then seeing their voice played next to their picture. I'm not a fan of audio diaries in modern games and I can't help thinking that they're just a lazy/easy way for developers to drop exposition.

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    I think an unreliable narrator is a lot harder to detect or even define in a visual medium such as video games. There's no one telling the story, because you are experiencing it yourself. I mean, does either Ryan or Atlas really count as a narrator? They're not telling the story, you experience it through Jack who is misled but not unreliable. A movie or a novel are capable of narrowing your perspective to a degree that a video game can't. None of your experiences in Rapture were distorted or unreal (not even the ADAM ghosts), it all happened as we saw it. A twist in the story doesn't equal an unreliable narrator, imo.
    I'd say the closest thing to Jack being an unreliable narrator is how at the start it doesn't show that Jack is the one who caused the plane to crash. It just shows Jack looking at the picture of his 'family' then the screen cuts to black. Then we see Jack in the ocean and apparently Jack doesn't know that he was the one who crashed the plane (I'm basing this off the fact that Jack seemed surprised when Ryan told him that he crashed the plane).

    One thing I'm not sure of is how Jack seemed to forget that he was the one who killed the plane's pilot and caused the plane to crash? Remember the letter just told him to cause the plane to crash but it didn't tell him to forget what he just did. Additionally Jack didn't forget any of the things he did in Rapture when he was controlled by the 'Would you kindly?' command phrase. My head canon is that when the plane crashed, Jack hit his head against something and that caused him to forget what he just did.

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    I guess Booker would be closer to being one, but again, he's not telling the story and doesn't have the intention to conceal anything he knows or finds important to mention to the player. Same as Jack or Revan from KotOR, he isn't lying or is mentally ill, he just doesn't possess all the info and gets tricked by others as a result. A "clueless narrator" would be a more fitting term I think.

    An actual unrealiable protagonist I know of in gaming is Walker from Spec Ops: The Line, and I did like that game. Silent Hill 2 also has one, though I never played it myself. Maybe it's because of the different medium but if a novel pulled the same thing as the game did I wouldn't have liked it as much. Visuals are just more powerful and versatile. A director of a game needs to put a lot more effort into a scenery like that for the player to not suspect anything. When an author is throwing you off with misleading descriptions, it just feels cheap to me.

    As to why it's popular, well I guess it's the easiest route for a narrative game that wants to have a twist in the story. A protagonist that knows everything and is in complete control at all times just doesn't work for that kind of storytelling. Amnesia/memory wipe is a very common trope. Maybe the writers of future games will get a bit more imaginative. Spec Ops cleverly used mental illness (severe PTSD) for example.
    So you dislike an unreliable narrator in written works because it feels cheap but you don't mind it as much in games because it feels like a lot of effort went into concealment? What about films then? Films are more expressive than books but not as much as games. What do you think of unreliable/clueless narrators in film?

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    I read Sherlock Holmes' The Hound of Baskerville and saw the movie as well (the one with Peter Cushing). The story was good but I wasn't hooked on the characters. After that I haven't really looked and just sticked to general crime/mystery stories without a detective, like Alfred Hitchcock's collections. I might try Rowling's series when I have time.
    Many people consider The Hound of Baskerville to be the best Sherlock Holmes book. I think what's notable about The Hound of Baskerville is that in many ways it feels like a Christie novel. It has a lot of tropes you can find in a Christie novel. Even some of the clues, e.g. finding out that someone is a blood relation by comparing their face with a portrait, were used in Christie's works.

    On second thought, I don't think you'll like Rowling's series too much. The problem is that the detective is like Batman in terms of personality. A battle hardened war veteran who never has a smile on his face. Maybe you'll like his Watson-equivalent better: a female ex-psychology student.

    I tend not to like detective stories without a detective main character. I prefer complex detective stories and if none of the main characters are detectives themselves then what the author usually does is dumb down the mystery so even an ordinary person can solve it. A good example of this would be 'Why Didn't They ask Evans?'. It was too obvious who the criminal was. I was disappointed in that because Christie had already written some of her best Hercule Poirot books by then. 'And then there were none' seemed to bypass this flaw because none of the non-detective characters were meant to solve the mystery.

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    It isn't first edition, just a really old one from the 70s. The title of this piece didn't actually change here until very recently due to Western influence, as the N-word isn't considered offensive, it just means "black person" and nothing more (there are no actual black people around who would object either). In theater they still promote it as New Title/Old Title, so it would be recognizable.
    So in theater they have it promoted as 'And then there were none/Ten little n******'? They actually have that written on advertising pamphlets?

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    I go once or twice a year, and choose mostly comedies. I think that's a genre that definitely works better in theater. The viewer feels closer to the story, almost involved in it, especially when the actors purposefully involve them either in a staged or a spontaneous way. A movie can't do that. Having the protagonist talk to a camera in a distant point in time versus having him walk right near you in real time are completely different experiences.

    I don't feel like cinemas siphoned people away from theater, they don't offer the same thing. Though it's true that the legacy nations of the Austrian Empire have a strong theater culture that not even the commies could kill, it might not be the case elsewhere. Traditional plays, operas and operettes continue to be popular, and it's not uncommon for companies or schools to hand out season passes at a discount with little to no tax, endorsed by the state. It also helps that especially in Budapest there's an abundance of recognizable A-lister actors/celebrities regularly playing in theaters while the tickets remain affordable for anyone.
    Did the A-lister actors/celebrities get their status from solely their performance in theater? In Australia, I've never heard of anyone who became an A-lister actors/celebrities by just performing in theater. Movies yeah but theater, no.

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    It might be my English failing me but I have no idea. Isn't the word "scarce" usually used with objects in insufficient quantity?
    That's the literal meaning but I think in this video she was trying to be more metaphorical. In my opinion, when she said 'scarce', she meant Drake would give up on the adventure.

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    Distrust between scoundrels, no honor among thieves and all. It also plays a part that Sam wants to reduce the chances of his charade's exposure and he knows that Sully is a perceptive guy without bias towards him, so rousing Nate against him is logical. Meanwhile Sully is actually justified about his own trust issues towards Sam, while Sam's prove to be unfounded. They might share a few traits, but they are not the same.
    That's the thing that I have trouble putting my finger on. Why doesn't Sully have a bias towards Sam? I mean Sully has known Sam for years as well. It sounds like they had some fight over something in the past but that is never brought up in the game.

    I honestly think they just had Sully and Sam be on bad terms because they needed some excuse to explain why we never saw Sam with Sully in any of the flashbacks/earlier material (such as the Uncharted comics).

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    I'd say it's world-driven first, character-driven second. The very first question that pops up in the player's mind at the start is most probably "What the heck happened here?", and a bit later "What's the deal with this person?" comes to the forefront as well. It's no big spoiler that the two are directly connected and both mysteries unfold together through the main plot. It does take its time as the suspense stretches on. While it's not completely free of clichés, I think it was done very well. As per video game trope, the protagonist is the single most important being in the game's world, but it has a believable and well-explained reason behind it which I like a lot. It never felt forced.

    Aloy's personality is a bit undefined, but she's a 19-year-old with a constant identity crisis, a "bit undefined" is what she's supposed to be so I'm fine with that. She does get a bit deeper mid-game onward. Her arc is interesting nevertheless and leaves a lot of room for sequels. The subtle ending was perfect for the game's tone as well as for that arc. I can imagine the developers doing a similar approach with her in the future as The Witcher had with Geralt, where you can make choices but can't affect her core personality. I haven't been this excited for a faraway sequel in quite some time.
    How many characters are there in the game for Aloy to interact with anyway? Most of the promotional material depicted Aloy is pretty lonesome character. Is that true?

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    I played every AC until Unity and took a break recently. It does get tired after this many entries already. I'm in the minority who didn't like Ezio that much (I think AC Rogue's Shay was the most interesting so far), the first game is still my favorite. I saw some footage of the twins from Syndicate and they do seem fun, but Victorian London is boring as hell so I'll probably play it sometime later.
    The first game was my favourite as well. I wanted them to make more games with Altair but I could see it would be difficult as the first game seemed to conclude his story so well.

    Is Rogue the game in which you play as the Templar who stops assassinations? I thought that concept was interesting but I don't know about the character. What do you think it is that makes Shay interesting as a character?

    Yeah Victorian London is a pretty dull setting. I think a problem with the Assassin's Creed games is that they can literally take place anywhere in history but so far, Ubisoft has felt some sort of obligation to have almost every games' setting be chosen in chronological order. I can their creative development meetings going something like this:

    'The first game was set in the Crusades so the next game has to be set after the Crusades. We can't go back in time. We have to only go forward. The next game should be in the Renaissance. Then the next game should be during the American Revolution. Then the French Revolution. Then Victorian London. We have to keep going forward.'

    The only game which didn't follow this formula was Assassin's Creed 4 which was set in the Great Age of Piracy which preceded the American Revolution of Assassin's Creed 3 but it was still relatively within the same time period so in terms of setting it wasn't too different.

    However it looks like the upcoming Assassin's Creed game (which is expected to be announced at E3) will solve this problem. Have you seen the leaked screenshots:
    http://au.ign.com/articles/2017/05/0...emingly-leaked

    It seems to be set in Ancient Egypt which is a great setting. I think ancient history is more interesting in terms of setting than modern history. In modern history, everything looks too similar. Ancient history, is far more exotic and interesting to look at.

    It's also rumoured that we're going back to having a modern day protagonist like Desmond in the next game which is a great idea. I liked Desmond as a character although I think Ubisoft ended his story terribly in Assassin Creed 3. Assassin Creed 3 did quite poorly with characters IMO. Honestly I find Connor to be a walking contradiction. One minute hes going on about how he doesn't want to kill people, next minute he's assassinating people. I think making an assassin a pacifist was a terrible idea and I don't know why Ubisoft decided to do it.



    Also remember that video game reviewer I mentioned earlier, Joseph Anderson? He made a 2 hour analysis video of Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T15-xfUr8z4&t=5527s

    I think this is the best review video I've seen so far of the game. I've played the game with my cousin's Switch and I agree with a lot of what he has to say.


    Also did you hear of how Hollywood is planning to release their own adaption of Murder on the Orient Express this year? They just released a trailer for it 2 days ago:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mq4m3yAoW8E

    What do you think? I think it looks terrible. The guy who's supposed to be Poirot, doesn't look a thing like Poirot. Leave it to Hollywood to ruin everything.

    Above all this, I don't see why we're getting another adaption of Murder on the Orient Express. We've already had enough good adaptions of that. What I want is a faithful adaption of 'The Murder of Roger Ackroyd'. There actually is a faithful adaption but it's a Russian film called 'Неудача Пуаро ("Neudacha Puaro" = "Poirot's Failure")'.

    The entire film is on YouTube but the problem is that there are no English subtitles so I can't understand what they're saying. Since you're from East Europe, I'm wondering if you know of any site which has English subtitles for this film?

  5. #3125
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    A lighthouse in Budapest
    Posts
    2,286
    Quote Originally Posted by TSCR View Post
    What do you think of Dragon Age 2 compared to Origins and Inquisition? I think it's story is decent but it's world not so much.I don't find that city (forgot its name) they were in to be a particularly memorable location.
    It suffered a lot from EA's insane deadline, anyone can tell that. During my first playthrough I pretty much loathed it because it was so unlike Origins in most aspects, including the odd-looking character models, the bright colors, the cartoony fights etc.
    I eased up on it a bit later because it did have an interesting story structure and some decent plot points. I still have a hard time understanding EA's point of view at the time, crushing the talented team that just delivered a succesful game to them with that crazy short schedule so they would be bound to follow-up with a lackluster product. I'm 100% sure that if the developers had been given a more reasonable time frame, we would have gotten a much broader, much more polished game that could have been on par or even better than Origins. But it is how it is now, with DA 2 being the redheaded stepchild of the series. But I think Inquisition deserves credit for following up on its story elements and characters that did work instead of just pretending it doesn't exist.

    Were audio diaries the best that they could so with BioShock 1 though? Audio diaries as a narrative device were used a lot in old school CRPGs which I think made sense because those games were made on a small budget. However nowadays, games have a much bigger budget.

    I think it would have been better if games nowadays used video diaries or something to that effect. Watching a video of someone talking would be more involving then seeing their voice played next to their picture. I'm not a fan of audio diaries in modern games and I can't help thinking that they're just a lazy/easy way for developers to drop exposition.
    Audio diaries made sense in Rapture where people were encouraged to try out new technology, and the stuff was just lying around because their owners were mostly dead. Still not the most exciting way of exposition, but I have no idea what it could be replaced with in that setting to be honest.

    I don't think video diaries are a good idea. Most players would never sit still to watch some diary entry that may very well be entirely unimportant to the story. With audio-only, they can at least rummage the room to their heart's content while not missing out. Case in point: Horizon Zero Dawn. That game has a lot of diaries in basically 4 forms: text-only, audio-only, holograms (video), and some hybrid of the latter two (these). The setting would justify all diaries being in video form because of in-game history. However, the game very rarely uses them and mostly at key points in the story when it was absolutely necessary, in small enclosed spaces. Why? Because it's a big open world with plenty of things to grab the player's attention at any given time. Even I had a hard time sitting through a 2-minutes-long exposition holo because there was a vast abandoned shelter to explore behind it, with a bunch of other (audio) diaries that wouldn't take away time from looting or looking out for potential enemies.

    Even those hybrid bits with the still images are condensed to be very brief, and placed in out-of-sight places where only the explorer-type players would go anyway. I think they made a good decision with all this. If they want the player to pay attention to visual exposition, they have to narrow down their view drastically. If they don't do that, people just won't care and it would just be a waste of resources that could have been better used elsewhere. I think the same is true for more linear games. If you can't involve the character into the exposition, it's better to just leave it to non-visual clues.

    I'd say the closest thing to Jack being an unreliable narrator is how at the start it doesn't show that Jack is the one who caused the plane to crash. It just shows Jack looking at the picture of his 'family' then the screen cuts to black. Then we see Jack in the ocean and apparently Jack doesn't know that he was the one who crashed the plane (I'm basing this off the fact that Jack seemed surprised when Ryan told him that he crashed the plane).

    One thing I'm not sure of is how Jack seemed to forget that he was the one who killed the plane's pilot and caused the plane to crash? Remember the letter just told him to cause the plane to crash but it didn't tell him to forget what he just did. Additionally Jack didn't forget any of the things he did in Rapture when he was controlled by the 'Would you kindly?' command phrase. My head canon is that when the plane crashed, Jack hit his head against something and that caused him to forget what he just did.
    Problem with the head injury is that Fontaine couldn't have foreseen that happening. But in order for his plan to work, Jack must remain oblivious (otherwise why the trouble with planting fake memories into him?). Psychological shock doesn't cut it either, since Jack has zero problems murdering hundreds of drug addicts after that. Since the game doesn't answer this, I just wrote it off as plot convenience. It happens to the best as well.

    (Maybe if we bring Burial at Sea into it there could be a contrived reason why a form of Elizabeth was indeed on the plane in that moment and erased that specific experience somehow, but I wouldn't buy into that.)

    So you dislike an unreliable narrator in written works because it feels cheap but you don't mind it as much in games because it feels like a lot of effort went into concealment? What about films then? Films are more expressive than books but not as much as games. What do you think of unreliable/clueless narrators in film?
    I think it lies inbetween, both in effort and in effect. I liked Fight Club just fine, but it can never have the same impact as it could have in game form.

    Many people consider The Hound of Baskerville to be the best Sherlock Holmes book. I think what's notable about The Hound of Baskerville is that in many ways it feels like a Christie novel. It has a lot of tropes you can find in a Christie novel. Even some of the clues, e.g. finding out that someone is a blood relation by comparing their face with a portrait, were used in Christie's works.
    Now that you mention it, it does seem true.

    On second thought, I don't think you'll like Rowling's series too much. The problem is that the detective is like Batman in terms of personality. A battle hardened war veteran who never has a smile on his face. Maybe you'll like his Watson-equivalent better: a female ex-psychology student.
    If his environment is interesting enough I don't mind a Batman character. I did like the animated series in the 90s for its colorful not-Batman roster.

    I tend not to like detective stories without a detective main character. I prefer complex detective stories and if none of the main characters are detectives themselves then what the author usually does is dumb down the mystery so even an ordinary person can solve it. A good example of this would be 'Why Didn't They ask Evans?'. It was too obvious who the criminal was. I was disappointed in that because Christie had already written some of her best Hercule Poirot books by then. 'And then there were none' seemed to bypass this flaw because none of the non-detective characters were meant to solve the mystery.
    And what do you think of stories wherein the mystery is only explained to the reader, like in And Then There Were None? Does it make it less interesting to you? Or if there is a detective present who can't solve it, but the reader still has all the info at the end?

    So in theater they have it promoted as 'And then there were none/Ten little n******'? They actually have that written on advertising pamphlets?
    They do. A tourist might have a double take on that, but as I said it's not a hateful word here.

    Did the A-lister actors/celebrities get their status from solely their performance in theater? In Australia, I've never heard of anyone who became an A-lister actors/celebrities by just performing in theater. Movies yeah but theater, no.
    If someone's an actor here, he/she is usually everything at once: voice actor, theater actor, movie actor, TV actor, show host etc. And it doesn't really matter which branch they started with, they end up doing everything (or at least multiple things) anyway. The reason for that is primarily the material side of things. It's Eastern Europe, every industry is underfunded, payments are low and actors are no exception. They couldn't maintain a decent living by theater acting alone, they'd starve. By doing as many things as they can, they can afford a place in the middle class, or in the upper middle class at most.

    That's the literal meaning but I think in this video she was trying to be more metaphorical. In my opinion, when she said 'scarce', she meant Drake would give up on the adventure.
    If that's what she meant then I'm not sure she even knows her own character. That would be the most un-Nate thing to do I can think of.

    That's the thing that I have trouble putting my finger on. Why doesn't Sully have a bias towards Sam? I mean Sully has known Sam for years as well. It sounds like they had some fight over something in the past but that is never brought up in the game.

    I honestly think they just had Sully and Sam be on bad terms because they needed some excuse to explain why we never saw Sam with Sully in any of the flashbacks/earlier material (such as the Uncharted comics).
    That's possible. But it's never implied that Sam and Sully have ever been friends. A friend of a friend is not necessarily a friend to you. They have Nate as the common friend, but one of them will always feel like the third wheel when being in the same space. When the common friend is not around the other two have no reason to stick together. I think that's realistic.

    How many characters are there in the game for Aloy to interact with anyway? Most of the promotional material depicted Aloy is pretty lonesome character. Is that true?
    Both true and not. Aloy is/was an outcast, which is an equivalent of a lowly untouchable that normal tribesfolk aren't allowed to even talk to. Since people have been mostly terrible to her previous to the main plot, making friends is not her No. 1 priority. But she gets rid of the outcast status fairly early in the game and does gain a few over time. They aren't BioWare or Witcher style companions by any stretch but they are allies who do help around, some also have roles in the main story. They have nice designs as well.

    Is Rogue the game in which you play as the Templar who stops assassinations? I thought that concept was interesting but I don't know about the character. What do you think it is that makes Shay interesting as a character?
    Shay is the greyest in morality from the AC protagonists so far. He starts out as a regular devout foot soldier for the Assassins like in most other entries, but the order's dubious actions make him question his own alignment. He then steps on the slippery slope of becoming a villain himself and subverting all of his values, but that's really subjective. We witness no less dubious Templar deeds that he doesn't, so he actually went from one corrupt order to another without realizing it. He's conflicted all the way through. I played this parallel to Unity and was surprised how well they coordinated Rogue's ending with Unity's beginning. It was an 'Oh snap' moment, very well done. Too bad most people don't know this game even exists due to its release's poor timing.

    Yeah Victorian London is a pretty dull setting. I think a problem with the Assassin's Creed games is that they can literally take place anywhere in history but so far, Ubisoft has felt some sort of obligation to have almost every games' setting be chosen in chronological order. I can their creative development meetings going something like this:

    'The first game was set in the Crusades so the next game has to be set after the Crusades. We can't go back in time. We have to only go forward. The next game should be in the Renaissance. Then the next game should be during the American Revolution. Then the French Revolution. Then Victorian London. We have to keep going forward.'
    It made sense when they followed Desmond's bloodline, but after AC 3 that restraint made no sense anymore, so I don't get it either. Since they can't do a game in modern times without devolving into a generic open-world shooter, they go random now. I'm excited for Egypt.

    It's also rumoured that we're going back to having a modern day protagonist like Desmond in the next game which is a great idea. I liked Desmond as a character although I think Ubisoft ended his story terribly in Assassin Creed 3. Assassin Creed 3 did quite poorly with characters IMO. Honestly I find Connor to be a walking contradiction. One minute hes going on about how he doesn't want to kill people, next minute he's assassinating people. I think making an assassin a pacifist was a terrible idea and I don't know why Ubisoft decided to do it.
    No arguments there.

    Also remember that video game reviewer I mentioned earlier, Joseph Anderson? He made a 2 hour analysis video of Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T15-xfUr8z4&t=5527s

    I think this is the best review video I've seen so far of the game. I've played the game with my cousin's Switch and I agree with a lot of what he has to say.
    Makes sense from what I've seen of it. How does the story hold up compared to other Zelda games?

    Also did you hear of how Hollywood is planning to release their own adaption of Murder on the Orient Express this year? They just released a trailer for it 2 days ago:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mq4m3yAoW8E

    What do you think? I think it looks terrible. The guy who's supposed to be Poirot, doesn't look a thing like Poirot. Leave it to Hollywood to ruin everything.
    The trailer is sensational Hollywood nonsense (the music choice is especially terrible), but it deserves a chance. It seems to have a lot of acting talent in one place. Is another adaptation necessary? Of course not, but we didn't complain the last dozen times, I don't see why we should start now. If it flops, everyone will just forget about it. That Poirot moustache is inexcusable though.

    What I want is a faithful adaption of 'The Murder of Roger Ackroyd'. There actually is a faithful adaption but it's a Russian film called 'Неудача Пуаро ("Neudacha Puaro" = "Poirot's Failure")'.

    The entire film is on YouTube but the problem is that there are no English subtitles so I can't understand what they're saying. Since you're from East Europe, I'm wondering if you know of any site which has English subtitles for this film?
    I've checked all of the sites I could think of, Russian ones too, both legal and not so legal but they only have it without subtitles. They usually put out English text for the major Russian features but this is a bit of an obscure one it seems. I asked a Ukrainian person but she hasn't heard about it either. Unless a good soul puts one up on the youtube versions, it's stuck with the not-so-helpful auto translate.

  6. #3126
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Limbo
    Posts
    3,559
    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    Problem with the head injury is that Fontaine couldn't have foreseen that happening. But in order for his plan to work, Jack must remain oblivious (otherwise why the trouble with planting fake memories into him?). Psychological shock doesn't cut it either, since Jack has zero problems murdering hundreds of drug addicts after that. Since the game doesn't answer this, I just wrote it off as plot convenience. It happens to the best as well.

    (Maybe if we bring Burial at Sea into it there could be a contrived reason why a form of Elizabeth was indeed on the plane in that moment and erased that specific experience somehow, but I wouldn't buy into that.).
    Jack hijacking the plane was pre programed into Jack before he left Rapture on the orders of Fontaine. You can't really get a note with "Would You Kindly" in it to give Jack the orders complex set of orders he needed to follow. Seeing/opening the box with the pistol was a trigger event that caused Jack to follow the program to hijack the plane. And when he was done, the program wiped his memory of what had happened. sm

  7. #3127
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,058
    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    It suffered a lot from EA's insane deadline, anyone can tell that. During my first playthrough I pretty much loathed it because it was so unlike Origins in most aspects, including the odd-looking character models, the bright colors, the cartoony fights etc.
    I eased up on it a bit later because it did have an interesting story structure and some decent plot points. I still have a hard time understanding EA's point of view at the time, crushing the talented team that just delivered a succesful game to them with that crazy short schedule so they would be bound to follow-up with a lackluster product. I'm 100% sure that if the developers had been given a more reasonable time frame, we would have gotten a much broader, much more polished game that could have been on par or even better than Origins. But it is how it is now, with DA 2 being the redheaded stepchild of the series. But I think Inquisition deserves credit for following up on its story elements and characters that did work instead of just pretending it doesn't exist.
    I think many people found Inquisition to be too dragged out. Personally I wouldn't mind if the next Dragon Age game is shorter and more concise like Dragon Age 2. Would you mind seeing the next Dragon Age game in a vein similar to Dragon Age 2? I don't think we can expect BioWare to ever put out something on par with Origins but I do think they can handle Dragon Age 2 well enough.

    Also what do you think of Dragon Age 2 in comparison to Inquisition? Personally I like Dragon Age 2 better. The characters and story were better imo and the game didn't feel dragged out with all the unnecessary MMO-like features present in Inquisition.

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    Problem with the head injury is that Fontaine couldn't have foreseen that happening. But in order for his plan to work, Jack must remain oblivious (otherwise why the trouble with planting fake memories into him?). Psychological shock doesn't cut it either, since Jack has zero problems murdering hundreds of drug addicts after that. Since the game doesn't answer this, I just wrote it off as plot convenience. It happens to the best as well.

    (Maybe if we bring Burial at Sea into it there could be a contrived reason why a form of Elizabeth was indeed on the plane in that moment and erased that specific experience somehow, but I wouldn't buy into that.)
    Did Jack have to remain oblivious? When he knew he was being brainwashed by the 'Would you kindly?' command phrase into attacking Ryan, he managed to resist a little but ultimately had to carry out the order.

    Maybe the whole aspect of planting memories was just to make it all easier? Maybe Fontaine suspected that Jack would come to Rapture with some idea that he was being controlled so he planted fake memories into him to decrease the chance of Jack's suspicions arising.

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    If his environment is interesting enough I don't mind a Batman character. I did like the animated series in the 90s for its colorful not-Batman roster.
    Well his environment is 2010-2011 London. Not sure if you would find that interesting.

    I wouldn't call the series noir but it does borrow a lot of elements from that genre. There's quite a bit that has to do with strippers, love lives etc.

    I'm not sue if you ever got around to reading/watching Harry Potter. I remember you said you found the series to be cliche which I agree with. To me, the best thing about Harry Potter is the world building. I think Rowling is great at world building. How she designed this hidden wizarding world with its own social and political system is fascinating. However the plot she writes aren't really anything special.

    I would say that Cormoran Strike is a more personal series than Harry Potter. I suspect that Rowling is revealing a lot about her own life in the Cormoran Strike books.

    For example in the first book, a celebrity apparently commits suicide by jumping off the building. Strike has to investigate if it really is a suicide and thus he investigates her celebrity life. The books deals a fair bit with what celebrities go through and I suspect that Rowling from personal experience here because she is a celebrity herself.

    The second book is even more indicative of this feature. In this book, an author is going to publish a book that figuratively reveals some scandals behind the people in the publishing agency in which he works for. Then that author is murdered so Strike has to investigate his death by investigating the publishing world and how books get published. I think this is clearly Rowling writing from personal experience since she's an author herself and has been in the publishing world for years.

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    And what do you think of stories wherein the mystery is only explained to the reader, like in And Then There Were None? Does it make it less interesting to you?
    'And Then There Were None' is the only book that I know of that does this. I think 'And Then There Were None' was satisfying but I don't think I can comment on how well this method works as a whole because I haven't read many books like it.

    BTW have you read all of the Hercule Poirot books? You know this author named Sophie Hannah has been approved by Agatha Christie's estate to write some new Hercule Poirot books? So far she has revealed two new Hercule Poirot books in 2014 and 2016 respectively.

    I've read them and while I think they're decent, I don't think they bring anything new to the series. They're basically set in the 1920s and has Poirot team up with a Captain Hastings-clone from Scotland Yard.

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    Or if there is a detective present who can't solve it, but the reader still has all the info at the end?
    Never read a book like this. Do you know any books like this?

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    If that's what she meant then I'm not sure she even knows her own character. That would be the most un-Nate thing to do I can think of.
    But didn't Nate lose his sense of adventure in certain points of both Uncharted 1 and Uncharted 2? How do you explain Nate's decisions then?

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    Both true and not. Aloy is/was an outcast, which is an equivalent of a lowly untouchable that normal tribesfolk aren't allowed to even talk to. Since people have been mostly terrible to her previous to the main plot, making friends is not her No. 1 priority. But she gets rid of the outcast status fairly early in the game and does gain a few over time. They aren't BioWare or Witcher style companions by any stretch but they are allies who do help around, some also have roles in the main story. They have nice designs as well.
    Also something I think games do better than any other medium is world building. How would you describe the world of Horizon Zero Dawn? How memorable is it compared to other video game worlds such as Rapture and Columbia?

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    Shay is the greyest in morality from the AC protagonists so far. He starts out as a regular devout foot soldier for the Assassins like in most other entries, but the order's dubious actions make him question his own alignment. He then steps on the slippery slope of becoming a villain himself and subverting all of his values, but that's really subjective. We witness no less dubious Templar deeds that he doesn't, so he actually went from one corrupt order to another without realizing it. He's conflicted all the way through. I played this parallel to Unity and was surprised how well they coordinated Rogue's ending with Unity's beginning. It was an 'Oh snap' moment, very well done. Too bad most people don't know this game even exists due to its release's poor timing.
    How was Unity from a story standpoint? I never played it due to all of its technical issues.

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    It made sense when they followed Desmond's bloodline, but after AC 3 that restraint made no sense anymore, so I don't get it either. Since they can't do a game in modern times without devolving into a generic open-world shooter, they go random now. I'm excited for Egypt.
    Did you like what you saw of Assassin's Creed Origins in E3? I thought it all looked promising. I loved the environments and I can't wait to climb a pyramid.

    The only problem I have is that the trailer and name of the game imply that this Egyptian Assassin Order is chronologically the first Assassin's Brotherhood. I don't like that. TBH I think it places another unnecessary limit on what Ubisoft can do. Now Ubisoft is going to say:

    'The Egyptian Assassins are the first assassins. Now all of our games have to be set after Ancient Egypt. None of them can be set before.'

    ^This is the same mistake Ubisoft made last time by having each Assassin's Creed game set after the crusades in Assassin's Creed 1. I hoped they wouldn't repeat it. The best thing I can say is that at least Ancient Egypt is further back in time than the Crusades so leaves a lot of interesting time periods for Ubisoft to explore in the future.

    I have to say that I don't think this was my favourite E3. Other than Assassin's Creed and Uncharted: The Lost Legacy, there was nothing that really interested me. How did you find this year's E3?

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    Makes sense from what I've seen of it. How does the story hold up compared to other Zelda games?
    Story of this game is nothing special. If you've played a few Zelda games, you can probably guess who the bad guy is. The high points of this game are the exploration and the gameplay.

    Also Joseph Anderson recently did a video about games that are less about gameplay and story and more about providing an experience:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nhQ66CozrgY

    I think he makes some interesting points. He claims that experience-providing games rely on personal taste more than anything else. He cites that a reason for why he dislikes The Last Guardian. Do you agree with him on that?

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    The trailer is sensational Hollywood nonsense (the music choice is especially terrible), but it deserves a chance. It seems to have a lot of acting talent in one place. Is another adaptation necessary? Of course not, but we didn't complain the last dozen times, I don't see why we should start now. If it flops, everyone will just forget about it. That Poirot moustache is inexcusable though.
    Do you think that when Hollywood messes up an adaption it's more of the studio's fault or the writer's fault? I'm asking because Simon Kinberg, one of the writers of this film, said in an interview that Murder on the Orient Express was his favourite Christie novel and he was looking forward to adapting it. If this guy actually likes the novel then it's strange that this trailer looks so different from it.



    Also for once, a Dark Souls fan released a video criticising the series:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Np5PdpsfINA

    I think his most bold claim is that the combat in the Souls series is nothing special. I never thought about it that way but I think it makes sense. Do you agree with his criticisms?

    Also have you ever tried playing the Souls series for the lore rather than gameplay? The Souls series has an interesting way of conveying story. Basically nothing is explained. You start out in this mysterious lost city and as you walk around you get clues from the items you pick up and from the features of the monsters you see. You have to put these clues together to figure out what happened in the lost city before. It's kind of like a detective story but this time you're the detective and you're never told if your interpretation of past events is the right one so the story is kind of subjective.
    Last edited by TSCR; 06-23-2017 at 06:24 PM.

  8. #3128
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    A lighthouse in Budapest
    Posts
    2,286
    Quote Originally Posted by Solarmech View Post
    Jack hijacking the plane was pre programed into Jack before he left Rapture on the orders of Fontaine. You can't really get a note with "Would You Kindly" in it to give Jack the orders complex set of orders he needed to follow. Seeing/opening the box with the pistol was a trigger event that caused Jack to follow the program to hijack the plane. And when he was done, the program wiped his memory of what had happened. sm
    If he could be "preprogrammed" to do it so easily (which is never alluded to in the game), why not just preprogram Jack to waltz through Rapture and kill Ryan straight away without all the babysitting? A lot more efficient method to do the task, and Atlas was interested in the result, not the play itself, he's not the Joker. If Jack is essentially an organic robot, why even try to make him believe he is a human? If the answer to all this is "because it wouldn't give us the story as intended" then it's not a very good reason.

    Quote Originally Posted by TSCR View Post
    I think many people found Inquisition to be too dragged out. Personally I wouldn't mind if the next Dragon Age game is shorter and more concise like Dragon Age 2. Would you mind seeing the next Dragon Age game in a vein similar to Dragon Age 2? I don't think we can expect BioWare to ever put out something on par with Origins but I do think they can handle Dragon Age 2 well enough.
    I agree that Inquisition was dragged out and I wouldn't at all mind a more compact game. But doing something similar to DA2 again shouldn't be the goal, imo. That structure was clearly made with the rigid time constraints in mind, not because it was the best setting they could imagine. With the lead writers' words, Dragon Age was always supposed to be the story of Thedas (the world), and not of individuals. DA 2 focused too much on the Hawke family and their immediate environment instead of being a big epic this vast fantasy world begs for. We're 3 games into the series now and at least half of this world is still unexplored. I'm more interested in delving into it than narrowing the plot down to a much smaller place again.

    Also what do you think of Dragon Age 2 in comparison to Inquisition? Personally I like Dragon Age 2 better. The characters and story were better imo and the game didn't feel dragged out with all the unnecessary MMO-like features present in Inquisition.
    Inquisition wins for me, even with the padded out story and MMO nonsense. I prefer epics over confined character dramas, I think it just utilizes the setting better. If they would just remove the MMO elements and filled the same maps with actual content (with many-many more unique sidequests) the game would be all set. I think this is exactly what they are going to do in the next entry so I'm optimistic about it.

    I can only imagine a DA 2 like plot again in a spinoff, like a Telltale game. That would be great actually. But lets keep it big in the main ones.

    Did Jack have to remain oblivious? When he knew he was being brainwashed by the 'Would you kindly?' command phrase into attacking Ryan, he managed to resist a little but ultimately had to carry out the order.

    Maybe the whole aspect of planting memories was just to make it all easier? Maybe Fontaine suspected that Jack would come to Rapture with some idea that he was being controlled so he planted fake memories into him to decrease the chance of Jack's suspicions arising.
    If Atlas knew that Jack shaking off his fake memories would not interfere with the command phrase, why did he plant those memories in the first place? It seems like they weren't necessary for his mission at all. We could say "because if Jack was in the know sooner he might have asked Tenenbaum to remove the conditioning before he kills Ryan" but that wouldn't make sense either, since Atlas was genuinely surprised the woman could do such a thing so he couldn't have planned for that. This whole charade is rather pointless from Atlas's standpoint, it only serves the twist. I always thought this to be the weak point in BioShock's story. On the whole, it's a lot more flawed than people realize, not that I mind.
    (Heck, even Tenenbaum should have had the foresight of removing Jack's conditioning the minute he stepped into Rapture - or use the phrase on him herself for that matter - but that's a whole other plot hole right there.)

    Well his environment is 2010-2011 London. Not sure if you would find that interesting.
    Bummer. It probably isn't going to be my thing after all. A projecture of Rowling's personal life isn't the most exciting plot I could think of either.

    I'm not sue if you ever got around to reading/watching Harry Potter. I remember you said you found the series to be cliche which I agree with. To me, the best thing about Harry Potter is the world building. I think Rowling is great at world building. How she designed this hidden wizarding world with its own social and political system is fascinating. However the plot she writes aren't really anything special.
    I dunno, her world didn't seem well-thought-out to me. She kept throwing random magical elements and creatures atop a very basic hero's journey and hoped they would stick together. Hogwarts alone is chaotic enough (and incredibly poorly run) to push the suspense of disbelief beyond the limit. I think the only thing Rowling nailed was the supporting cast. They kept me entertained enough to be a reason to see the movies to the end.

    BTW have you read all of the Hercule Poirot books? You know this author named Sophie Hannah has been approved by Agatha Christie's estate to write some new Hercule Poirot books? So far she has revealed two new Hercule Poirot books in 2014 and 2016 respectively.
    I haven't read the new ones, but I plan to.

    I've read them and while I think they're decent, I don't think they bring anything new to the series. They're basically set in the 1920s and has Poirot team up with a Captain Hastings-clone from Scotland Yard.
    Exactly what the readers want. I don't see the problem. If she wanted to do something revolutionary a 100-year-old character with an iconic image wouldn't have been her first choice, I would think.

    Never read a book like this. Do you know any books like this?
    No, but I would very much be interested. I looked, but it doesn't seem to be a thing for some reason.

    But didn't Nate lose his sense of adventure in certain points of both Uncharted 1 and Uncharted 2? How do you explain Nate's decisions then?
    Good point, but he needed a whole of 2 minutes of convincing in either case. Especially because of his experiences in previous games, I don't see him playing the primadonna again.

    Also something I think games do better than any other medium is world building. How would you describe the world of Horizon Zero Dawn? How memorable is it compared to other video game worlds such as Rapture and Columbia?
    It's hard to compare it to BioShock becasue of the vastly different scale and time period, but I think the world is the most interesting part of Zero Dawn. It's still relatively new but it managed to create a recognizable aesthetic of its own. "Tribesmen vs giant robots" is their brand now, I don't see anyone else delving into that territory in the future.

    Everything in the game has a reason why it's the way it is, be it the animal-shaped robots, the tribe structures, the village locations, the racial diversity etc. There's a lot of thought and actual anthropological studies put into it. I think it comes together nicely. Since they started big, I only wish they would go bigger and further extend the lore in the sequel instead of getting comfortable and just repaint the robots.

    How was Unity from a story standpoint? I never played it due to all of its technical issues.
    It was quite decent. A lot more focused than Syndicate (I'm about halfway with that). It had an interesting dynamic between the protagonist and a Templar love interest and the Assassin-Templar conflict wasn't that black and white either. There are still some bugs, but most of the technical issues have been ironed out. The spooky character models are gone.

    Did you like what you saw of Assassin's Creed Origins in E3? I thought it all looked promising. I loved the environments and I can't wait to climb a pyramid.
    It looks good, but I'm not sure of the new fighting system. It seems too time-consuming for something that shouldn't be the player's focus. If you get into a big fight with multiple opponents in an AC game, you already screwed up. Better to get it over with as soon as possible than to slow down and play Dark Souls.

    The only problem I have is that the trailer and name of the game imply that this Egyptian Assassin Order is chronologically the first Assassin's Brotherhood. I don't like that. TBH I think it places another unnecessary limit on what Ubisoft can do. Now Ubisoft is going to say:

    'The Egyptian Assassins are the first assassins. Now all of our games have to be set after Ancient Egypt. None of them can be set before.'

    ^This is the same mistake Ubisoft made last time by having each Assassin's Creed game set after the crusades in Assassin's Creed 1. I hoped they wouldn't repeat it. The best thing I can say is that at least Ancient Egypt is further back in time than the Crusades so leaves a lot of interesting time periods for Ubisoft to explore in the future.
    Ancient Egypt is about the furthest possible time they could go when there were still high enough structures to climb, so I don't see the problem. Anything before that is basically Stone Age, and they already did Far Cry Primal. Maybe there could have been Babylon or Sumeria but that's already similar enough. (I'd have picked Babylon over Egypt any day, but I digress.)

    I have to say that I don't think this was my favourite E3. Other than Assassin's Creed and Uncharted: The Lost Legacy, there was nothing that really interested me. How did you find this year's E3?
    About average. Looking forward to Wolfenstein 2, the Horizon DLC, Sonic Forces and Cuphead. Not sure if The Lost Legacy is worth the money just yet.

    Also Joseph Anderson recently did a video about games that are less about gameplay and story and more about providing an experience:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nhQ66CozrgY

    I think he makes some interesting points. He claims that experience-providing games rely on personal taste more than anything else. He cites that a reason for why he dislikes The Last Guardian. Do you agree with him on that?
    Well, I do, but he's overanalyzing the obvious. It apparently took him a very long thought process to realize that tastes... differ by person. You don't say, Sherlock. At one point he even states that fans of these "experience games" shouldn't rave about them so much because there are people out there who just wouldn't feel the same way about these games *gasp*. This coming from the same guy who thrashed Inside on the basis of "I don't get this game" and bashed critics for praising The Last Guardian too much because he wasn't into the game, and since his technocrat mind is superior it must be some conspiracy against reason. Yes Joseph, artsy games are out to get you. So far they only existed to annoy you, but you decided to pull your head out of your bum and everything's different now.
    I really don't like this guy.

    Do you think that when Hollywood messes up an adaption it's more of the studio's fault or the writer's fault? I'm asking because Simon Kinberg, one of the writers of this film, said in an interview that Murder on the Orient Express was his favourite Christie novel and he was looking forward to adapting it. If this guy actually likes the novel then it's strange that this trailer looks so different from it.
    Nothing is a one-man-job these days. That writer guy may very well have nothing to do with that trailer. The studio has certain expectations. They provide a list of checkboxes to the filmmakers (e.g. it has to be PG-13, there have to be action scenes in it, there has to be a black person in the cast etc.) and then the writers and the director have to craft a movie that checks all those boxes and still be recognizable. Sometimes the studio's demands are unreasonable in the first place and the writers can't make anything watchable out of it. Or maybe the list wasn't anything special, but the writers still did a sloppy job, the director was drunk and the actors were bad. It's very hard to tell who messed up what after the fact but it's hardly ever just one person.

    Anything that comes out of the staff's mouth in these interviews is PR double talk anyways. Maybe this guy never read the book and absolutely hates his job. You have no way of knowing.

    Also for once, a Dark Souls fan released a video criticising the series:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Np5PdpsfINA

    I think his most bold claim is that the combat in the Souls series is nothing special. I never thought about it that way but I think it makes sense. Do you agree with his criticisms?
    I'm no fan of the From games, but this guy is a nitpicking hipster as always. I mean he criticizes the Souls series (which got a wildly increasing player base - and therefore expectations - with each entry) for not having the randomness of Demon Souls which he even explains had a troubled development and was almost canceled, hence the devs threw in every random mechanic for the funzies. Yes, the mechanic in Souls became more of the same as time went on because guess what, that's what sequels do. Being different just for the sake of it might satisfy that hipster itch, but it isn't something a responsible studio boss does if he wants to remain successful. Dark Souls had a much wider fanbase than Demon Souls for a reason, but whining is what hardcore fans are best at.

    Also have you ever tried playing the Souls series for the lore rather than gameplay? The Souls series has an interesting way of conveying story. Basically nothing is explained. You start out in this mysterious lost city and as you walk around you get clues from the items you pick up and from the features of the monsters you see. You have to put these clues together to figure out what happened in the lost city before. It's kind of like a detective story but this time you're the detective and you're never told if your interpretation of past events is the right one so the story is kind of subjective.
    I stopped playing the first Dark Souls about 4 hours in. It's just not my kind of game. The lore seemed interesting but punishing mechanics and monotone fights based on frustration siphon all the fun out of it. I don't play games for challenge. The main sensation I get from a game shouldn't be frustration. It might have the most interesting world in any game ever and it still wouldn't be worth the time, so I'll just pass. I'd rather just read it in novel form or something.

  9. #3129
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Limbo
    Posts
    3,559
    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    If he could be "preprogrammed" to do it so easily (which is never alluded to in the game), why not just preprogram Jack to waltz through Rapture and kill Ryan straight away without all the babysitting? A lot more efficient method to do the task, and Atlas was interested in the result, not the play itself, he's not the Joker. If Jack is essentially an organic robot, why even try to make him believe he is a human? If the answer to all this is "because it wouldn't give us the story as intended" then it's not a very good reason.
    No there is a good in universe reason for Atlas having to guide Jack. Programing him to take down an airplane is relatively easy to do. "Take the pistol, walk down the isle threaten anyone who tries to stop you or shoot them. Force the pilot to fly to a specific location and then crash the plane." There is little room of variation or surprises. But when Jack gets to Rapture there is no way to know what the city will be like ahead of time and so no way to program him ahead of time. So Atlas HAS to guide him. If Atlas does not have specific orders to do or not do something it's up to Jack to decide. Without Atlas guiding Jack, there is no way to know what he would have done. And Atlas was not going to leave his one and only chance to take out Ryan up to a roll of the dice. He was going for a sure thing. sm

  10. #3130
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    rapturerecords.tumblr.com
    Posts
    515
    Picked up the Singing Detective with Robert Downey Jr. and Adrian Brody. I'd love to know if any Bioshock developer or Ken Levine watched it. The film came out in 2003, the year before It's De-Lovely and Beyond the Sea, the respective biopics for Cole Porter (Kevin Kline) and Bobby Darin (Kevin Spacey), both of which use songs that eventually made it into Bioshock.

    Though there aren't as many parallels to Dark City that I noted last year, it does feature the titular character undergoing various mental breakdowns/hallucinations due to a disease which gives severe facial deformities and chronic pain. All these violent visions are accompanied by cheery 1950s-ish music due to his work as a cheesy detective writer.

    "How Much is That Doggie in the Window" is used prominently in the film as well as "Just Walking in the Rain". The first is used in Bioshock, while the second is present in the game files and named by Ken Levine in interviews, but oddly never played.

    "Praise the Lord and Pass the Ammunition" and "Ten Cents a Dance" are referenced in dialogue which were used in Bioshock 2. Though come to think of it, "Murder, He Says" is also mentioned, but used in LA Noire.

    Anyway, it was a nice watch coming from a Bioshock perspective. I might pick up the 6 episode BBC series it was based on starring Michael Gambon of Dumbledore fame.

  11. #3131
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Limbo
    Posts
    3,559
    I remember hearing "How Much is That Doggie in the Window" in BioShock 2 in a repair shop (Journey to the Surface). Odd that "Just Walking in the Rain" is in the files and not used. Both songs came out in 1952, Rapture was supposed to be cut off from the surface in 1951. "Ten Cents a Dance" is used on the loading screen for Siren Alley.

    (Note: Not trying to explain anything to Upgrade anything as I know he has this all down. Just a little background for people who aren't as well informed. Like me.) sm

  12. #3132
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,058
    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    I agree that Inquisition was dragged out and I wouldn't at all mind a more compact game. But doing something similar to DA2 again shouldn't be the goal, imo. That structure was clearly made with the rigid time constraints in mind, not because it was the best setting they could imagine. With the lead writers' words, Dragon Age was always supposed to be the story of Thedas (the world), and not of individuals. DA 2 focused too much on the Hawke family and their immediate environment instead of being a big epic this vast fantasy world begs for. We're 3 games into the series now and at least half of this world is still unexplored. I'm more interested in delving into it than narrowing the plot down to a much smaller place again.
    Personally I think it may be beneficial for BioWare to stay away from large-scale stories for a while. I think their current writing team is mediocre and it'll take them a while to get good. I'd like to see them focus on smaller stories because I think they'll be able to do a better job with them in the mean time.

    Also have you played Andromeda yet? I just watched Noah Caldwell-Gervais review of it:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ma0VKHnwArQ

    He seemed to dislike its story completely and he was very forgiving of Inquisition.

    I think BioWare might become the new Blizzard.

    Blizzard's old games (like StarCraft and WarCraft III) had pretty good stories but their recent games have pretty poor ones (StarCraft II especially). I think I remember you saying you played StarCraft I with cheats (I used cheats as well). I think it's story wasn't the greatest sci-fi story I've seen but I think it was awesome in terms of concepts and ambiance. But then Blizzard's writers left and then they got new writers which ruined the story in StarCraft II. Did you ever play StarCraft II?

    Also do you follow any e-sports? The only one I follow on a regular basis is StarCraft II. The reason why I follow it because of how diverse and varied it can be. I think the problem with most e-sports is that they get too predictable after a while. There are only a limited amount of unique weapons, maps etc but this often isn't the case with StarCraft II which has a lot of variety and multitude of playstyles. It's almost always interesting to watch.

    I usually watch VODs of the Global StarCraft II Tournaments on Afreeca TV's YouTube channel. They had the finals two weeks ago. Here's the VOD with English commentary:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2BTDUyglQpM

    The casters do a good job of explaining the strategies. I think most people can find StarCraft II tournaments interesting to watch.

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    If Atlas knew that Jack shaking off his fake memories would not interfere with the command phrase, why did he plant those memories in the first place? It seems like they weren't necessary for his mission at all. We could say "because if Jack was in the know sooner he might have asked Tenenbaum to remove the conditioning before he kills Ryan" but that wouldn't make sense either, since Atlas was genuinely surprised the woman could do such a thing so he couldn't have planned for that. This whole charade is rather pointless from Atlas's standpoint, it only serves the twist. I always thought this to be the weak point in BioShock's story. On the whole, it's a lot more flawed than people realize, not that I mind.
    (Heck, even Tenenbaum should have had the foresight of removing Jack's conditioning the minute he stepped into Rapture - or use the phrase on him herself for that matter - but that's a whole other plot hole right there.)
    I presume it's more that Atlas wasn't sure if Jack would be able to resist the "Would you kindly?" phrase or not when he was fully developed into a man that could take out Ryan. So he planted the memories just in case. But yeah this could have been explained better.

    As for Tenenbaum, I presume she wasn't aware who Jack was when she first met him. I think it was only later realised that Jack was the baby who she had helped condition to do Fontaine's bidding. Otherwise wouldn't she use the "Would you kindly?" command phrase on him to save the Little Sisters?

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    I dunno, her world didn't seem well-thought-out to me. She kept throwing random magical elements and creatures atop a very basic hero's journey and hoped they would stick together. Hogwarts alone is chaotic enough (and incredibly poorly run) to push the suspense of disbelief beyond the limit. I think the only thing Rowling nailed was the supporting cast. They kept me entertained enough to be a reason to see the movies to the end.
    IIRC you didn't read the novels so did you understand exactly what was going on in the movies? Starting from the third film, they cut out so many details from the films, that it became impossible to follow along unless you had read the novels. Only the last book was done justice because it was split into two films and had enough time to be done justice.

    Anyway I find Rowling's magical world to be fascinating as in it's an interesting world. It's the most in-depth magical world that's parallel to the human world that I can think of.

    What exactly do you mean by 'not well-thought-out'? Do you mean there are inconsistencies with how she portrays her world? I can't think of many inconsistencies. Could you name some? Maybe some things in the movies just didn't make sense because information got cut.

    I initially thought it's weird that the non-magical folk let their magical kids go to some school they never heard of. But then I thought it was like X-Men. When their kids developed magical powers, the parents didn't know what to do so when they got the letter from Hogwarts they were desperate enough to accept their help.

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    Exactly what the readers want. I don't see the problem. If she wanted to do something revolutionary a 100-year-old character with an iconic image wouldn't have been her first choice, I would think.
    Well often when old characters are brought back it's to do something new with them. For example, the Mary Russell series continues the stories of Sherlock Holmes but now he's married to a lady named Mary Russell and the series depicts his married life.

    If Sophie Hannah didn't want to do anything new with Poirot then why write another Poirot book? Why not just make up her own detective and have him star in her mystery?

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    Good point, but he needed a whole of 2 minutes of convincing in either case. Especially because of his experiences in previous games, I don't see him playing the primadonna again.
    So are you saying in later games like Uncharted 3, Nate never lost his sense of adventure?

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    It's hard to compare it to BioShock becasue of the vastly different scale and time period, but I think the world is the most interesting part of Zero Dawn. It's still relatively new but it managed to create a recognizable aesthetic of its own. "Tribesmen vs giant robots" is their brand now, I don't see anyone else delving into that territory in the future.

    Everything in the game has a reason why it's the way it is, be it the animal-shaped robots, the tribe structures, the village locations, the racial diversity etc. There's a lot of thought and actual anthropological studies put into it. I think it comes together nicely. Since they started big, I only wish they would go bigger and further extend the lore in the sequel instead of getting comfortable and just repaint the robots.
    Well if not BioShock, which video game world do you think its most akin to?

    I've started it and I think the world is interesting. I just wished that there were characters that I could talk to more. All the characters seem to leave too quickly. I'm up to the part after the ceremony in which Aloy becomes that representative. I can't believe they killed off all the other contestants so quickly. I thought they were going to be Aloy's companions for the rest of the game.

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    It looks good, but I'm not sure of the new fighting system. It seems too time-consuming for something that shouldn't be the player's focus. If you get into a big fight with multiple opponents in an AC game, you already screwed up. Better to get it over with as soon as possible than to slow down and play Dark Souls.
    I think they may be trying to recreate those large scale battles that occurred in Ancient Egypt. I know that doesn't tie well into a stealth game like Assassin's Creed but it looks like Ubisoft always try to be historically accurate with these games so they have to make some compromises here and there.

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    About average. Looking forward to Wolfenstein 2, the Horizon DLC, Sonic Forces and Cuphead. Not sure if The Lost Legacy is worth the money just yet.
    Are you going to wait for The Lost Legacy's reviews before deciding to buy it or not? I'm not sure if that would be a good idea because Naughty Dog games are almost always guaranteed to get good reviews even if they aren't that great i.e. The Last of Us: Left Behind DLC.

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    Well, I do, but he's overanalyzing the obvious. It apparently took him a very long thought process to realize that tastes... differ by person. You don't say, Sherlock. At one point he even states that fans of these "experience games" shouldn't rave about them so much because there are people out there who just wouldn't feel the same way about these games *gasp*. This coming from the same guy who thrashed Inside on the basis of "I don't get this game" and bashed critics for praising The Last Guardian too much because he wasn't into the game, and since his technocrat mind is superior it must be some conspiracy against reason. Yes Joseph, artsy games are out to get you. So far they only existed to annoy you, but you decided to pull your head out of your bum and everything's different now.
    I really don't like this guy.
    One reason why I think a lot of people like him is because he's an author as well and because of that he does offer some interesting thoughts on the narrative of games (as long as they interest him). Most of the game reviewers (like Mark Brown, Super Bunnyhop etc) don't really seem that interested in narrative. They seem to only care about gameplay so it's refreshing to see a reviewer who is thoughtful about a game's narrative as well.

    Recently Joseph Anderson released a video on "What Remains of Edith Finch":
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6bMn4CoyUkM

    He did a pretty good analysis of the story. If you don't mind spoilers, I suggest you to take a look at what he said.

    Also in case you haven't played it already, I highly recommend you to try "What Remains of Edith Finch". This seems like a typical minimal mechanic indie-style game but what it does well is with how it conveys past narratives.

    We've been discussing about whether audio diaries are acceptable narrative devices for the past few posts and I think "What Remains of Edith Finch" offers a good alternative. In it a girl visits her old family home to find out what happened to her family members. In it she finds notes, videos etc of what happened to members of her family. But we don't just read/watch what happened; we get to play it. Each of these past sequences are made interactive with their own set of mechanics. These really help them to feel personal to the individual involved. I've never seen past stories conveyed in games like this but it's so effective. I'd like to see more games copy what this game did.

    "What Remains of Edith Finch" is the first minimal mechanic indie-style game that I've liked as much as The Walking Dead Season 1. I think anyone who enjoys narrative driven games will enjoy this game.

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    Nothing is a one-man-job these days. That writer guy may very well have nothing to do with that trailer. The studio has certain expectations. They provide a list of checkboxes to the filmmakers (e.g. it has to be PG-13, there have to be action scenes in it, there has to be a black person in the cast etc.) and then the writers and the director have to craft a movie that checks all those boxes and still be recognizable. Sometimes the studio's demands are unreasonable in the first place and the writers can't make anything watchable out of it. Or maybe the list wasn't anything special, but the writers still did a sloppy job, the director was drunk and the actors were bad. It's very hard to tell who messed up what after the fact but it's hardly ever just one person.

    Anything that comes out of the staff's mouth in these interviews is PR double talk anyways. Maybe this guy never read the book and absolutely hates his job. You have no way of knowing.
    Well I thought this guy might have been more sincere since he was in the 'World's favourite Christie' event but I guess nowadays, a lot of people would use any opportunity for PR.

    Speaking of this, what do you consider to be Christie's best story? I remember you saying that The Chocolate Box was your favourite Poirot story but is it your favourite Christie story overall? I would say that Five Little Pigs is my favourite Christie story.

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    I stopped playing the first Dark Souls about 4 hours in. It's just not my kind of game. The lore seemed interesting but punishing mechanics and monotone fights based on frustration siphon all the fun out of it. I don't play games for challenge. The main sensation I get from a game shouldn't be frustration. It might have the most interesting world in any game ever and it still wouldn't be worth the time, so I'll just pass. I'd rather just read it in novel form or something.
    Well there aren't novels but there are Let's Plays. I suggest DaveControl. I think he's a great Let's Player and he knows a lot about the lore which he explains as he plays the game. Here's his Dark Souls 1 Let's Play:
    https://www.youtube.com/playlist?lis...dzVx2rUAQ3Lnst

    Also have you ever tried Lovecraft? Bloodborne's story is presented in a similar way to Dark Souls but Bloodborne is inspired heavily by Lovecraft. If you're a fan of Lovecraft, you might want to try a Bloodborne Let's Play:
    https://www.youtube.com/playlist?lis...uO3nxgnKwj-s3H

  13. #3133
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    A lighthouse in Budapest
    Posts
    2,286
    Quote Originally Posted by Solarmech View Post
    No there is a good in universe reason for Atlas having to guide Jack. Programing him to take down an airplane is relatively easy to do. "Take the pistol, walk down the isle threaten anyone who tries to stop you or shoot them. Force the pilot to fly to a specific location and then crash the plane." There is little room of variation or surprises. But when Jack gets to Rapture there is no way to know what the city will be like ahead of time and so no way to program him ahead of time. So Atlas HAS to guide him. If Atlas does not have specific orders to do or not do something it's up to Jack to decide. Without Atlas guiding Jack, there is no way to know what he would have done. And Atlas was not going to leave his one and only chance to take out Ryan up to a roll of the dice. He was going for a sure thing. sm
    After Atlas first contacts him, he can already assess pretty safely what he is and isn't capable of doing. After the first harmless "would you kindly" test, why not go "Would you kindly inject yourself with a bunch of plasmids and go kill Andrew Ryan right now?" Why wait and play around with him? Why risk Tenenbaum getting to him first? Well that's a trick question, he didn't even suspect that Tenenbaum could mess with his conditioning, despite the fact that's basically the exact same job he assigned her with back then. Uncharacteristic stupidity on his part, to make matters worse.

    Quote Originally Posted by TSCR View Post
    Personally I think it may be beneficial for BioWare to stay away from large-scale stories for a while. I think their current writing team is mediocre and it'll take them a while to get good. I'd like to see them focus on smaller stories because I think they'll be able to do a better job with them in the mean time.
    BioWare has multiple writing teams, one for each franchise they do. There's some mobility between them but not that much. Mass Effect's newbie team flopping this time doesn't mean anything for Dragon Age, SWTOR or their upcoming Anthem. Actually, the current lead writer for Dragon Age, Patrick Weekes, had been in the writing team of both Mass Effect's Shepard trilogy and Dragon Age Origins, plus the DA verse is following a predefined path unlike Andromeda. The success or flop of the eventual next entry won't really have a relation to Mass Effect's troubles. Not storywise at least.

    Also have you played Andromeda yet? I just watched Noah Caldwell-Gervais review of it:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ma0VKHnwArQ

    He seemed to dislike its story completely and he was very forgiving of Inquisition.
    Still didn't come around to it. Funny that this was my most anticipated game the same time last year and now I'm just pushing it further and further away like some homework. A bunch of surprisingly good games came out in the meantime (I'm really enjoying Injustice 2 right now), so I guess I got sidetracked.

    I think BioWare might become the new Blizzard.

    Blizzard's old games (like StarCraft and WarCraft III) had pretty good stories but their recent games have pretty poor ones (StarCraft II especially). I think I remember you saying you played StarCraft I with cheats (I used cheats as well). I think it's story wasn't the greatest sci-fi story I've seen but I think it was awesome in terms of concepts and ambiance. But then Blizzard's writers left and then they got new writers which ruined the story in StarCraft II. Did you ever play StarCraft II?
    I watched a cinematic cut of SC II since my potato PC couldn't handle it. It was rather disappointing. The change in writers was very noticeable, the story became rather cheesy and all over the place. A pity, I was a big fan of the first game's story and lore, I think the early tie-in books are also fun reads and do a much better job with the established characters (specifically Jim Raynor and Kerrigan, I think they completely butchered them in SC II).

    Also do you follow any e-sports? The only one I follow on a regular basis is StarCraft II. The reason why I follow it because of how diverse and varied it can be. I think the problem with most e-sports is that they get too predictable after a while. There are only a limited amount of unique weapons, maps etc but this often isn't the case with StarCraft II which has a lot of variety and multitude of playstyles. It's almost always interesting to watch.
    I get why it's interesting for most people, I just generally don't watch any kind of sports or e-sports. I prefer to do them myself, lame as it may be. Less excitement, but more fun that way.

    As for Tenenbaum, I presume she wasn't aware who Jack was when she first met him. I think it was only later realised that Jack was the baby who she had helped condition to do Fontaine's bidding. Otherwise wouldn't she use the "Would you kindly?" command phrase on him to save the Little Sisters?
    That's precisely the problem. By all logic she should have. She may not have recognized him in that scene where they first meet face to face, but she should have been able to connect the dots not much later seeing that she's perfectly capable of tracking Jack's every move. After all, she was the very person who helped make Jack into what he was just a few years before. Tenenbaum is a high-functioning autist who clearly remembers events way further into the past (like the Nazi doctors she impressed as a kid), it wouldn't make sense that she just forgot about a person that Atlas made her create for exactly the current timeframe. Better yet, she probably did connect the dots, but conveniently laid back until after Jack was made to kill his own dad. Why, Brigid? She supposedly developed a conscience around the Little Sisters, I doubt she valued Ryan's death more than Jack's freedom.

    IIRC you didn't read the novels so did you understand exactly what was going on in the movies? Starting from the third film, they cut out so many details from the films, that it became impossible to follow along unless you had read the novels. Only the last book was done justice because it was split into two films and had enough time to be done justice.
    The good folk here on this forum helped clear things up (Upgrade and Wrench Lurker if I'm not mistaken) and explained what they omitted from the movies or what they changed. I didn't find them to add that much to the world but it's true that I haven't read the books myself.

    Anyway I find Rowling's magical world to be fascinating as in it's an interesting world. It's the most in-depth magical world that's parallel to the human world that I can think of.
    To be fair, after the books' popularity rose, there wasn't much space for other writers doing similar settings without being labeled a ripoff, even if they could have done a better job. With Rowling, the impression I get is that she didn't initially plan this world to be big (which makes sense, since she didn't expect success to begin with), so she added more and more as she went. Stronger magical creatures, more efficient spells, more dangerous henchmen, more powerful artifacts that should have been sought after way earlier if this world didn't literally revolve around the protagonist and his respective power level in each entry. It's kinda like the escalation problem with shonen animes. For me, good world-building starts with planning big and way ahead.

    I initially thought it's weird that the non-magical folk let their magical kids go to some school they never heard of. But then I thought it was like X-Men. When their kids developed magical powers, the parents didn't know what to do so when they got the letter from Hogwarts they were desperate enough to accept their help.
    I wonder how long it took for the parents to realize that there were multiple highly dangerous areas both in the school itself and its immediate vicinity. How long would an average kid keep quiet about a forest filled with monsters, trolls in the basement or giant snakes in the sewers? X-men has the same problem, but at least that institute occasionally has trouble keeping its students.

    If Sophie Hannah didn't want to do anything new with Poirot then why write another Poirot book? Why not just make up her own detective and have him star in her mystery?
    Same reason why people write fan fiction. They enjoy playing around with established characters. Sophie Hannah basically writes high profile fan fiction, and nothing's wrong with that. It can even be a way to gain an audience for her own thing later.

    So are you saying in later games like Uncharted 3, Nate never lost his sense of adventure?
    Yeah. Of course they always put in some sequence where he's conflicted to check a box in the script but he always pushes forward at the end.

    Well if not BioShock, which video game world do you think its most akin to?
    Zero Dawn is like The Witcher mixed with Tomb Raider, with the story structure and protagonist type of the former, the action and exploration of the latter.

    I've started it and I think the world is interesting. I just wished that there were characters that I could talk to more. All the characters seem to leave too quickly. I'm up to the part after the ceremony in which Aloy becomes that representative. I can't believe they killed off all the other contestants so quickly. I thought they were going to be Aloy's companions for the rest of the game.
    Yeah, I also wished there were deeper dialogue trees. But this is an Action-RPG with heavier emphasis on the action and the core story, and they did get that part to be better than any RPG currently out there imo, I guess we can't have everything. Fingers crossed for more extensive RPG elements in the future.

    Are you going to wait for The Lost Legacy's reviews before deciding to buy it or not? I'm not sure if that would be a good idea because Naughty Dog games are almost always guaranteed to get good reviews even if they aren't that great i.e. The Last of Us: Left Behind DLC.
    I watched a Let's Play with Left Behind and I didn't feel I missed out on anything, so I might be doing the same with The Lost Legacy. Naughty Dog games are increasingly more cinematic even compared to the earlier Uncharteds, and I wasn't the biggest fan of U4 anyway.

    Also in case you haven't played it already, I highly recommend you to try "What Remains of Edith Finch". This seems like a typical minimal mechanic indie-style game but what it does well is with how it conveys past narratives.

    We've been discussing about whether audio diaries are acceptable narrative devices for the past few posts and I think "What Remains of Edith Finch" offers a good alternative. In it a girl visits her old family home to find out what happened to her family members. In it she finds notes, videos etc of what happened to members of her family. But we don't just read/watch what happened; we get to play it. Each of these past sequences are made interactive with their own set of mechanics. These really help them to feel personal to the individual involved. I've never seen past stories conveyed in games like this but it's so effective. I'd like to see more games copy what this game did.

    "What Remains of Edith Finch" is the first minimal mechanic indie-style game that I've liked as much as The Walking Dead Season 1. I think anyone who enjoys narrative driven games will enjoy this game.
    I did play it and I had a good time. The overall narrative is a bit out there, but I did very much like the creative gameplay and the varying themes. Especially the bit with the brother in the fishery: thoughtful, imaginative, and one of the more believable scenarios. I haven't seen anything else like it, so hats off to the devs.

    There's a similar game that I liked a bit better overall for its amazing atmosphere: The Vanishing of Ethan Carter. It came out a few years earlier. It doesn't have the same clever gameplay ideas, but its story is more intriguing (even if the ending is stupid). If you liked Edith Finch I suggest you peek into that one.

    Speaking of this, what do you consider to be Christie's best story? I remember you saying that The Chocolate Box was your favourite Poirot story but is it your favourite Christie story overall? I would say that Five Little Pigs is my favourite Christie story.
    Tough question. I think "best" in this case should be the one that the most effort and planning went into on her part, even if I wasn't crazy about it personally. So I'd say either Murder on The Orient Express or And Then There Were None. The former is not my favorite but there's no doubt that it's cleverly structured, juggles with a lot of easily distinguishable characters and has an unexpected ending, just like the latter.

    Well there aren't novels but there are Let's Plays. I suggest DaveControl. I think he's a great Let's Player and he knows a lot about the lore which he explains as he plays the game. Here's his Dark Souls 1 Let's Play:
    https://www.youtube.com/playlist?lis...dzVx2rUAQ3Lnst
    He sure knows a lot but he's not really newbie-friendly. He targets other Souls fans and almost speedruns the thing. I'll look for others when I have the time. It would be a lot easier if this series had book tie-ins like Liberty's Crusade for Starcraft, or at least comics. Part retread of the game, part its own story. I'm surprised this haven't been done so far, big franchises like that have the audience to support that.

    Also have you ever tried Lovecraft? Bloodborne's story is presented in a similar way to Dark Souls but Bloodborne is inspired heavily by Lovecraft. If you're a fan of Lovecraft, you might want to try a Bloodborne Let's Play:
    https://www.youtube.com/playlist?lis...uO3nxgnKwj-s3H
    Not the biggest fan of Lovecraft. I think he's a one-trick-pony. You've read one of his stories you've read them all. I liked it the first time, not much so later. I do realize this is not a popular opinion. I guess if you stick to the same thing forever it eventually becomes a brand.
    In any case, I'll watch a Bloodborne Let's Play only after Dark Souls.

  14. #3134
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Limbo
    Posts
    3,559
    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    After Atlas first contacts him, he can already assess pretty safely what he is and isn't capable of doing. After the first harmless "would you kindly" test, why not go "Would you kindly inject yourself with a bunch of plasmids and go kill Andrew Ryan right now?" Why wait and play around with him? Why risk Tenenbaum getting to him first? Well that's a trick question, he didn't even suspect that Tenenbaum could mess with his conditioning, despite the fact that's basically the exact same job he assigned her with back then. Uncharacteristic stupidity on his part, to make matters worse.
    Atlas WAS trying to get Jack to kill Ryan. But if he just ordered Jack to kill Ryan, Jack might have found ways to subvert the orders in some way. But if Jack thinks he has a reason to kill Ryan he will be much more effective at doing it. Also Frank is a con man. It's his nature to manipulate and fool people, even when he may not need to.

    As for Tenenbaum, it is unsure if Atlas knew that she was still alive before the encounter at the Medical Pavilion. And while creating Jack was done under Frank's orders, Suchong was the one that did the mental conditioning, not Tenenbaum. She probably only learned about some of the WYK programing by accident or she went hunting for a few of Suchong's secrets. Tenenbaum didn't even seem to know about the command phrase since she didn't even try to use it on Jack to keep him from possibly killing the Little Sisters. sm

  15. #3135
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Limbo
    Posts
    3,559
    Just a little something I noticed looking around on Robb Water's site ( http://www.robbwatersart.com/new-page/ ). On his Freelance page he has listed Ghost Story Games, OtherSide Entertainment, Nightdive Studios, and The Deep End Games. All these studios have large numbers of former Irrational staff in them or are working on the System Shock IP. Guess they still like working with Mr. Waters. sm

  16. #3136
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Rapture
    Posts
    171
    Wow ! You're still here. Why don't you make an "upgrade". There's a small community on Reddit too.
    "Bring us the girl and wipe away the debt"

  17. #3137
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Limbo
    Posts
    3,559
    You mean there are still some real conversations about BSI going on? sm

  18. #3138
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Rapture
    Posts
    171
    Quote Originally Posted by Solarmech View Post
    You mean there are still some real conversations about BSI going on? sm
    Yes ! Here, take a look : https://www.reddit.com/r/Bioshock/.
    "Bring us the girl and wipe away the debt"

  19. #3139
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    rapturerecords.tumblr.com
    Posts
    515
    This falls firmly in the category of miscellany, but there was a promo on PBS of Daniel Tiger's Neighborhood (a spinoff of Mr. Rogers)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eYgsbI4eu_M

    The trumpets at the beginning announcing Daniel Tiger becoming king appear to be using the same sound effect used when you add pictures to Cohen's Quadtych.

    @2:41

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFRVoQIyXqU

    I wonder if PBS and Bioshock drew from the same sound effects library.

  20. #3140
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Limbo
    Posts
    3,559
    They might have. The tune on those horns is rather popular though. sm

  21. #3141
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Limbo
    Posts
    3,559
    A new TV show called "The Alienist" is coming from TNT soon. Why is it of interest to BSI fans? It's set in New York City in 1896. A Trailer for it: https://youtu.be/JcJQnaXiCfI Seems to have good production values, is accurate to the times and talented actors. The series is based on a book of the same name. The writer of the original novel is a historian. sm

  22. #3142
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    rapturerecords.tumblr.com
    Posts
    515
    Let's hope it does as well as The Knick, Ripper Street, Copper, The Murdoch Mysteries, and Miss Fisher/Poirot.

    I've been looking for another historical detective drama.

    I've been meaning to read the book, although I have noticed other historical true crime novels have similar cover art from Last Days of Night, American Lightning, most of the Erik Larson novels from Devil in the White City to Thunderstruck, and a couple others that I'm devouring.

  23. #3143
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Limbo
    Posts
    3,559
    Well we know "Devil In the White City" was a huige influence on BSI from interviews with the Devs. sm

  24. #3144
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    rapturerecords.tumblr.com
    Posts
    515
    Soundcloud apparently narrowly escaped closure. In any case, there's a couple of Bioshock interviews/podcasts that only exist on Soundcloud.

    Of course, a loss of this post would be a tragedy for me.

    https://irrationalgames.ghoststoryga...burial-at-sea/

  25. #3145
    Upgraded my video card to a GTX 1080 Ti, damn BS: Infinite looks glorious in 4K. You think the BioShock Collection on the Xbox One X would receive a 4K patch/upgrade?

  26. #3146
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,058
    @biccs_pudding

    Sorry for the very late reply. I got busy with work.

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    BioWare has multiple writing teams, one for each franchise they do. There's some mobility between them but not that much. Mass Effect's newbie team flopping this time doesn't mean anything for Dragon Age, SWTOR or their upcoming Anthem. Actually, the current lead writer for Dragon Age, Patrick Weekes, had been in the writing team of both Mass Effect's Shepard trilogy and Dragon Age Origins, plus the DA verse is following a predefined path unlike Andromeda. The success or flop of the eventual next entry won't really have a relation to Mass Effect's troubles. Not storywise at least.
    It's possible that the departure of the writers may have some effect on particular elements of the story.

    I'm not the biggest fan of BioWare so I don't know a lot about their writing teams but I am a big fan of Naughty Dog and I believe I have a good understanding of the dynamics of their writing team.

    For Uncharted, the writing team usually consisted of Neil Druckmann, Amy Hennig and Josh Scherr. They were the writers for the first two Uncharted games. During Uncharted 3, Naughty Dog was developing The Last of Us simultaneously so Amy Hennig was the only writer. However for Uncharted 4, the writers were just Neil Druckmann and Josh Scherr. I think the absence of a particular writer in a certain game may suggest what they were typically responsible for in the writing team.

    Druckmann admitted in an interview that he was bad at writing jokes so he depended on Scherr to write them.

    This explains why The Last of Us was a story that barely had any jokes (not that it needed any but that's kind of the point; Druckmann on his own can only write a story that doesn't need any jokes). I'd say Druckmann deals with the darker, grounded and family-centric elements of Naughty Dog's stories.

    As for Hennig, I'd say that she likes writing on dark subject matter as well but not the same as Druckmann. While Druckmann likes to keep everything grounded, I think Hennig likes to go into the fantastical. I think Hennig is a fan of dark fantasy (she was the lead writer of The Legacy of Kain). I think all the supernatural enemies in the Uncharted games were designed by her. That explains why Uncharted 3 (the only game with two supernatural enemies; the spiders the djinn) was written by her. It also explains why Uncharted 4, the only game that she didn't contribute to, didn't have any supernatural elements.

    The reason why I'm bringing this up is because I believe different writers do different things well and for a story to stay consistent it needs to have diversely talented group of writers. For Dragon Age, if some of the writers that handled certain elements in the previous games left then those elements may not be handled well in the future even if they were predefined.

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    Still didn't come around to it. Funny that this was my most anticipated game the same time last year and now I'm just pushing it further and further away like some homework. A bunch of surprisingly good games came out in the meantime (I'm really enjoying Injustice 2 right now), so I guess I got sidetracked.
    BioWare announced that they won't release any story DLC for Andromeda. People are speculating about why they decided to do so. This guy offers a decent opinion:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0wBvNTEwrI

    What do you think?

    Also do you like Injustice 2 better than the first Injustice?

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    I watched a cinematic cut of SC II since my potato PC couldn't handle it. It was rather disappointing. The change in writers was very noticeable, the story became rather cheesy and all over the place. A pity, I was a big fan of the first game's story and lore, I think the early tie-in books are also fun reads and do a much better job with the established characters (specifically Jim Raynor and Kerrigan, I think they completely butchered them in SC II).
    Did you ever play WarCraft III? I noticed that Blizzard recycled a lot of elements from StarCraft's story in WarCraft III e.g. Arthas is basically Kerrigan, Burning Legion is the Zerg etc. Blizzard really likes recycling StarCraft's story (probably because it's the best sotry they ever wrote). They even did so in StarCraft 2 expect this time they had the hybrids take on the role of the Zerg.

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    I get why it's interesting for most people, I just generally don't watch any kind of sports or e-sports. I prefer to do them myself, lame as it may be. Less excitement, but more fun that way.
    I think one reason why people watch pro-players is because they can do things that we can't do because we don't have the time to practice as much as them. Don't you ever want to see that?

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    That's precisely the problem. By all logic she should have. She may not have recognized him in that scene where they first meet face to face, but she should have been able to connect the dots not much later seeing that she's perfectly capable of tracking Jack's every move. After all, she was the very person who helped make Jack into what he was just a few years before. Tenenbaum is a high-functioning autist who clearly remembers events way further into the past (like the Nazi doctors she impressed as a kid), it wouldn't make sense that she just forgot about a person that Atlas made her create for exactly the current timeframe. Better yet, she probably did connect the dots, but conveniently laid back until after Jack was made to kill his own dad. Why, Brigid? She supposedly developed a conscience around the Little Sisters, I doubt she valued Ryan's death more than Jack's freedom.
    Wasn't Jack a baby when he was transported out of Rapture? If so then it might make sense for Tenenbaum to not recognise Jack as an adult. Could she even tell that Atlas was controlling Jack with the command phrase?

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    To be fair, after the books' popularity rose, there wasn't much space for other writers doing similar settings without being labeled a ripoff, even if they could have done a better job.
    True but parallel fantasy worlds have been around for ages. However Rowling is the first author that I know that did them in depth with their own government, school, society etc. Why didn't anyone ever create an in-depth parallel fantasy world before Rowling?

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    With Rowling, the impression I get is that she didn't initially plan this world to be big (which makes sense, since she didn't expect success to begin with), so she added more and more as she went. Stronger magical creatures, more efficient spells, more dangerous henchmen, more powerful artifacts that should have been sought after way earlier if this world didn't literally revolve around the protagonist and his respective power level in each entry. It's kinda like the escalation problem with shonen animes. For me, good world-building starts with planning big and way ahead.
    What do you think are the best constructed fictional worlds that you've ever seen?

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    I wonder how long it took for the parents to realize that there were multiple highly dangerous areas both in the school itself and its immediate vicinity. How long would an average kid keep quiet about a forest filled with monsters, trolls in the basement or giant snakes in the sewers? X-men has the same problem, but at least that institute occasionally has trouble keeping its students.
    I just assumed that if anything got too bad, the teachers just put memory charms on students to make them forget what they saw. Kind of like what that incompetent dark arts defense teacher was doing in the second film (using memory charms to stop people from finding out he's a fraud).

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    I watched a Let's Play with Left Behind and I didn't feel I missed out on anything, so I might be doing the same with The Lost Legacy. Naughty Dog games are increasingly more cinematic even compared to the earlier Uncharteds, and I wasn't the biggest fan of U4 anyway.
    Okay so I watched a Let's Play for The Lost Legacy and I have to say that I find it to be disappointing. The biggest problem is Chloe. She's so massively out of character. We only get glimpses off the personality she had in Uncharted 2/3. For most of The Lost Legacy, Chloe goes on about some father we never heard about and who was an expert on Hindu lore. They made Chloe too much like Nate. There's even a scene where Chloe tries to reason with the bad guy to not kill her because she's an expert on Hindu lore.

    Sam also appears later on in the game and I find that to be kind of disappointing. If they had Sam present since the start of the game then they wouldn't have had to make Chloe some Hindu historian. I guess the reason why they kept Sam out of the start of the game is because they wanted to concentrate on the girls.

    I'd say The Lost Legacy works well as a female duo story. There aren't many female duo that have the female duo as protagonists stories out there as far as I know. Can you think of any?

    Just pretend Chloe is a different character and you may enjoy The Lost Legacy. Personally I think Naughty Dog should steer clear of doing Story DLCs because they seem to have a habit of making writing their characters out-of-character in them.

    Hopefully Zero Dawn's DLC is good.

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    I did play it and I had a good time. The overall narrative is a bit out there, but I did very much like the creative gameplay and the varying themes. Especially the bit with the brother in the fishery: thoughtful, imaginative, and one of the more believable scenarios. I haven't seen anything else like it, so hats off to the devs.

    There's a similar game that I liked a bit better overall for its amazing atmosphere: The Vanishing of Ethan Carter. It came out a few years earlier. It doesn't have the same clever gameplay ideas, but its story is more intriguing (even if the ending is stupid). If you liked Edith Finch I suggest you peek into that one.
    I thought Ethan Carter was okay. The story was unique but the gameplay elements weren't anything I hadn't seen before. They even had puzzle where you had to use tear-like things to use things from the past (kind of reminded me of Infinite). Overall I'd say I like Edith Flinch better. What did you find about Ethan Carter's atmosphere that made it surpass Edith Flinch in your eyes?

    What did you interpret the Flinch family curse to be in "What Remains of Edith Finch"?


    Recently I finally got around to watching Star Wars: The Force Awakens (yeah I know I'm late). This film got good reviews but honestly it looks like they're just copying A New Hope. This isn't a surprise to me because J.J. Abrams is known for just recycling old stories. I just wonder why everyone is okay with it. Is it really just nostalgia?


    Also Rowling's Cormoran Strike series is currently airing on the BBC as Strike (TV series). If you want to see if you may like the series but not want to commit to reading the books just yet, then I suggest you try watching the episode. There are only 7 episodes in total (3 have aired so far) and they're only one hour each.

  27. #3147
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Limbo
    Posts
    3,559
    Quote Originally Posted by Jakkaru View Post
    Upgraded my video card to a GTX 1080 Ti, damn BS: Infinite looks glorious in 4K. You think the BioShock Collection on the Xbox One X would receive a 4K patch/upgrade?
    Very much doubt it. sm

  28. #3148
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    A lighthouse in Budapest
    Posts
    2,286
    Quote Originally Posted by TSCR View Post
    It's possible that the departure of the writers may have some effect on particular elements of the story.

    I'm not the biggest fan of BioWare so I don't know a lot about their writing teams but I am a big fan of Naughty Dog and I believe I have a good understanding of the dynamics of their writing team.

    The reason why I'm bringing this up is because I believe different writers do different things well and for a story to stay consistent it needs to have diversely talented group of writers. For Dragon Age, if some of the writers that handled certain elements in the previous games left then those elements may not be handled well in the future even if they were predefined.
    I agree. The next DA game will be the first in the series without David Gaider's involvement, the guy who basically started the whole thing. I do worry a bit about the impact his absence will make on the story. But on the other hand, as many good storylines and lore that were written by Gaider, he did almost as many subpar ones too, especially in Inquisition. I think Weekes is capable of handling the transition well, we'll have to wait for the result though.

    BioWare announced that they won't release any story DLC for Andromeda. People are speculating about why they decided to do so. This guy offers a decent opinion:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0wBvNTEwrI

    What do you think?
    His explanation makes sense, but I don't think it's the whole story. Dragon Age 2 had the same kind of critical flop and backlash back in the day, EA was as horrible as it is today, yet it still got a story DLC, a quite decent one too. I think that behind the scenes, the restructuring/layoffs in the Mass Effect team after Andromeda's release were so drastic that they were in no shape to develop anything.

    Also do you like Injustice 2 better than the first Injustice?
    Definitely. Every single element is improved, the animations are cutting edge (some characters are almost photorealistic, it gives even Naughty Dog a run for its money), and it has a surprisingly good story mode for a superhero beat 'em up. I mean, the genre obviously has limitations, coupled with the decades-old silly character origins that still had to be included, but the writers made the most out of it. That deserves some praise.

    Did you ever play WarCraft III? I noticed that Blizzard recycled a lot of elements from StarCraft's story in WarCraft III e.g. Arthas is basically Kerrigan, Burning Legion is the Zerg etc. Blizzard really likes recycling StarCraft's story (probably because it's the best sotry they ever wrote). They even did so in StarCraft 2 expect this time they had the hybrids take on the role of the Zerg.
    I never noticed that before, but now this bugs me. Good point. Dammit, Blizzard.

    I think one reason why people watch pro-players is because they can do things that we can't do because we don't have the time to practice as much as them. Don't you ever want to see that?
    I recently watched a stream of an Injustice 2 tournament, and it's actually the first one I enjoyed. The mechanics of the game and the precision required from the players make for very fast-paced, exciting matches where nothing is set in stone and the tiniest mistake can turn the tide. I feel other genres rely too much on snowballing the advantage you gain at the beginning and then just following pre-established patterns. In fighting games you don't have that, so I might be hooked on this one.

    Wasn't Jack a baby when he was transported out of Rapture? If so then it might make sense for Tenenbaum to not recognise Jack as an adult. Could she even tell that Atlas was controlling Jack with the command phrase?
    She might not have recognized him when they first met, but she had to do so eventually once she saw what he's been doing in the city. And once she did, there's no way she didn't also realize what Atlas needed him for. Tenenbaum had to know about the phrase (how else would she know how to counter it? She didn't hear Atlas's radio messages and Jack wasn't able to tell her at any point), it's not hard to guess that if he wanted that very specific thing in Jack he'll want to use it in due time. And even if she didn't know the exact phrase being WYK, she saw what Jack was doing: clutching to a radio, going to very specific destinations, doing very specific and violent things, obtaining very specific objects. Going for a different objective each time after listening to that radio. Pretty curious behavior from a clueless outsider. Wouldn't all this be suspicious enough for an observing Tenenbaum to send Jack a message like "Hey mein dear, you don't happen to take thinly veiled orders from a kindly con man from that radio, do you?"

    The current plot relies on Tenenbaum being stupid/complacent for a convenient time period, whereas her characterization suggests the exact opposite.

    True but parallel fantasy worlds have been around for ages. However Rowling is the first author that I know that did them in depth with their own government, school, society etc. Why didn't anyone ever create an in-depth parallel fantasy world before Rowling?
    They did, just not in a modern world setting.

    What do you think are the best constructed fictional worlds that you've ever seen?
    It's not a universe I personally like, but I have to say Tolkien's books. It's the granddady of modern fantasy and its influence can't be overstated. Without it, there'd be no Star Wars, Warhammer, Dragon Age, Dune, Elder Scrolls, The Witcher, Game of Thrones or tons of other fictional giants, or at least they wouldn't exist in their current form. Some of them might have grown way bigger and more popular than the Tolkienverse ever was, but that's where the trend started. That it still holds up very well today is quite an achievement.

    I just assumed that if anything got too bad, the teachers just put memory charms on students to make them forget what they saw. Kind of like what that incompetent dark arts defense teacher was doing in the second film (using memory charms to stop people from finding out he's a fraud).
    Doesn't that sound like an Orwellian dystopia though? I don't think that was Rowling's aim with Hogwarts.

    Okay so I watched a Let's Play for The Lost Legacy and I have to say that I find it to be disappointing. The biggest problem is Chloe. She's so massively out of character. We only get glimpses off the personality she had in Uncharted 2/3. For most of The Lost Legacy, Chloe goes on about some father we never heard about and who was an expert on Hindu lore. They made Chloe too much like Nate. There's even a scene where Chloe tries to reason with the bad guy to not kill her because she's an expert on Hindu lore.
    I only watched half of it yet, but yeah, that's the same feeling I got. This isn't the Chloe I remember.

    Sam also appears later on in the game and I find that to be kind of disappointing. If they had Sam present since the start of the game then they wouldn't have had to make Chloe some Hindu historian. I guess the reason why they kept Sam out of the start of the game is because they wanted to concentrate on the girls.
    So Sam infiltrates this game too, oh joy. Really looking forward to that...
    I still don't see why we couldn't have incompetent protagonists for a change of pace to stay in-character, especially since it was headed by Scherr. He's good with comedy, why not use his talents?

    I'd say The Lost Legacy works well as a female duo story. There aren't many female duo that have the female duo as protagonists stories out there as far as I know. Can you think of any?
    The only one that comes to mind aside from Left Behind is Amy. Though one of them is a kid, not sure if that counts, it's basically a long escort mission in a zombie setting. It's not a very good game either.
    There aren't many games with multiple protagonists to begin with, I don't think females are being handwaved in this case.

    Hopefully Zero Dawn's DLC is good.
    I don't expect anything groundbreaking but I hope it's not just an extra area with slightly different robots and side missions.

    I thought Ethan Carter was okay. The story was unique but the gameplay elements weren't anything I hadn't seen before. They even had puzzle where you had to use tear-like things to use things from the past (kind of reminded me of Infinite). Overall I'd say I like Edith Flinch better. What did you find about Ethan Carter's atmosphere that made it surpass Edith Flinch in your eyes?
    Ethan Carter was more unpredictable, with a greater sense of mystery. There were sharp jumps between adventuring, exploration, puzzle solving and even horror. I never knew what to expect, so it drew me in more. That, the open spaces and the music. It almost felt like a real place.

    In Edith Finch, you get an outline for the whole story in the first ten minutes or so. Exploring a dozen stupid ways to die in an improbably-shaped house. It was a nice house, but it felt very limited.

    What did you interpret the Flinch family curse to be in "What Remains of Edith Finch"?
    Well, the other thing I didn't quite like is that there was no point to the story. No grand relevations, no moral, literally just a journal. I didn't interpret it to be more than a "family curse for no reason" because they never hinted at anything more. I guess that's what it's meant to be, just an arbitrary connection to tell the stories of these people. It's not meant to have an answer.

    Recently I finally got around to watching Star Wars: The Force Awakens (yeah I know I'm late). This film got good reviews but honestly it looks like they're just copying A New Hope. This isn't a surprise to me because J.J. Abrams is known for just recycling old stories. I just wonder why everyone is okay with it. Is it really just nostalgia?
    I think it's a big part of it, yeah. It got positive reviews, but it proved to be very divisive among the audience. I genuinely think a lot of reviewers only rated it so high because they thought the audience would universally like it, since it's the same as the original films everyone was gushing about. Turns out it's not that simple. Puts things into perspective. I didn't like it either. People can trash the prequels all they like, they were at least original stories. Funny that they got a newfound appreciation after EpVII's release.

    Rogue One is better, but at this point all I see is Disney's money-milking factory at work, not genuine interest in enriching this universe.

    Also Rowling's Cormoran Strike series is currently airing on the BBC as Strike (TV series). If you want to see if you may like the series but not want to commit to reading the books just yet, then I suggest you try watching the episode. There are only 7 episodes in total (3 have aired so far) and they're only one hour each.
    Will do.

  29. #3149
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    rapturerecords.tumblr.com
    Posts
    515
    Bit of a random thought: if you were to recreate Leonardo's Last Supper with Bioshock characters, who would you put in from left to right?

  30. #3150
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Limbo
    Posts
    3,559
    I really have no idea how a Last Supper would would with BioShock characters. You have more than a few that would put themselves right at the center. sm

  31. #3151
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,058
    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    His explanation makes sense, but I don't think it's the whole story. Dragon Age 2 had the same kind of critical flop and backlash back in the day, EA was as horrible as it is today, yet it still got a story DLC, a quite decent one too. I think that behind the scenes, the restructuring/layoffs in the Mass Effect team after Andromeda's release were so drastic that they were in no shape to develop anything.
    Do you think Dragon Age is a bigger franchise than Mass Effect? I'm wondering if BioWare may do the same thing with the next Dragon Age game since they had to restructure the team for that as well.

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    I recently watched a stream of an Injustice 2 tournament, and it's actually the first one I enjoyed. The mechanics of the game and the precision required from the players make for very fast-paced, exciting matches where nothing is set in stone and the tiniest mistake can turn the tide. I feel other genres rely too much on snowballing the advantage you gain at the beginning and then just following pre-established patterns. In fighting games you don't have that, so I might be hooked on this one.
    That's a fair point. Fighting games also have the added advantage of having a well set method to play. In RTS games, the metagame starts with players doing all sorts of weird strategies to win. I don't think you can do that in a RTS game.

    But I think that may work against the fighting game in the long run. Having a well set method to play often means there isn't too much diversity in how to play. Do you know how big the current Injustice 2 pro scene is? Do you think it will last long?

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    She might not have recognized him when they first met, but she had to do so eventually once she saw what he's been doing in the city. And once she did, there's no way she didn't also realize what Atlas needed him for. Tenenbaum had to know about the phrase (how else would she know how to counter it? She didn't hear Atlas's radio messages and Jack wasn't able to tell her at any point), it's not hard to guess that if he wanted that very specific thing in Jack he'll want to use it in due time. And even if she didn't know the exact phrase being WYK, she saw what Jack was doing: clutching to a radio, going to very specific destinations, doing very specific and violent things, obtaining very specific objects. Going for a different objective each time after listening to that radio. Pretty curious behavior from a clueless outsider. Wouldn't all this be suspicious enough for an observing Tenenbaum to send Jack a message like "Hey mein dear, you don't happen to take thinly veiled orders from a kindly con man from that radio, do you?"

    The current plot relies on Tenenbaum being stupid/complacent for a convenient time period, whereas her characterization suggests the exact opposite.
    Maybe she was just more concerned with rescuing the Little Sisters then she was with saving Jack? Jack did get saved from Ryan's self-destructing office by the Little Sisters right? Maybe it was the Little Sisters that finally caused her to consider Jack?

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    They did, just not in a modern world setting.
    So they did it in like a Middle Ages setting? Which stories are you referring to?

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    It's not a universe I personally like, but I have to say Tolkien's books. It's the granddady of modern fantasy and its influence can't be overstated. Without it, there'd be no Star Wars, Warhammer, Dragon Age, Dune, Elder Scrolls, The Witcher, Game of Thrones or tons of other fictional giants, or at least they wouldn't exist in their current form. Some of them might have grown way bigger and more popular than the Tolkienverse ever was, but that's where the trend started. That it still holds up very well today is quite an achievement.
    Why don't you like the Tolkeinverse? Is it because of it's good vs. evil simplicity?

    Also have you watched/read Game of Thrones? I don't know about the books but the show seems to be going downhill ever since they started writing their own material.

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    Doesn't that sound like an Orwellian dystopia though? I don't think that was Rowling's aim with Hogwarts.
    Maybe.

    TBH Rowling's world does seem to be inconsistent in terms of how dark it's supposed to be. This is evident more in the books than the films.

    For example in Goblet of Fire, it's revealed that in the past a number of contestants in the TriWizard Cup have been killed. If that's the case then why are they still holding that tournament? I mean the contestants are teenage wizards/witches. Don't the schools value their safety? IRL any school would have cancelled a tournament that had a history of causing its student contestants lose their life.

    Also I find how Rowling portrays death in her books to be inconsistent. On one hand, she has a lot of her characters killed off to show how grim reality is. On the other hand, Harry's 20 year old mother can stop him from being killed by Voldemort by using ancient love magic that only she conveniently knows. I find it really strange that a dark world that a lot of people can die in also has a way to avoid death and that way is the power of love. It feels very inconsistent.

    Honestly I think love is the most cliche thing in fiction and I think it's very difficult to write about it in a meaningful way. I think that's why a lot of writers blow love out of proportion and give it power that it doesn't really have.

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    So Sam infiltrates this game too, oh joy. Really looking forward to that...
    I think Naughty Dog may be planning on starting a new Uncharted trio with Chloe, Nadine and Sam and may plan on bringing them together in later games.

    TBH I could see what Naughty Dog was trying to go for in The Lost Legacy but I don't think it worked out that well. The biggest problem is that they approached familiar characters from weird out-of-place angles and that makes it difficult for the audience to sympathise with them. It's not just Chloe who suffers from this, Nadine suffers as well.

    Later on in the game we find out that initially Chloe was working with Sam and after Sam got captured by the bad guy, Chloe got Nadine to help her because Nadine had some history with the bad guy. However Chloe knew about Nadine's history with Sam so she hid Sam's involvement with her until they found where Sam was being kept. Chloe wanted to rescue Sam but Nadine felt betrayed and got angry with Chloe.

    Naughty Dog tried to make this scene a tragic rift in friendship but it didn't really work. Honestly Nadine is no saint. She was working with Rafe who was the one that caused Sam to be stuck in jail for ages (by randomly killing the security guard). It made sense for Sam to fight off Nadine and her men. When Nadine gets angry at Chloe for Sam, I just can't sympathise with her. I mean we were killing her men and fighting her in Uncharted 4. Now I'm supposed to feel sorry for her losses? That's an odd demand for a story to make.

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    I still don't see why we couldn't have incompetent protagonists for a change of pace to stay in-character, especially since it was headed by Scherr. He's good with comedy, why not use his talents?
    Because it wasn't headed by Scherr. This is a still from the credits:



    I had this suspicion from last year and it looks like I was correct. This is a wannabe Neil Druckmann story.

    I don't dislike all of Druckmann's stories but I honestly think that other writers should be given a chance to write a story without his influence.

    The Lost Legacy has all the hallmarks of a Neil Druckmann story. It looks like Druckmann recited the entire story and Scherr just wrote it down.

    It's set primarily in a jungle environment which is the same environment of Uncharted 4. I honestly think the reason why Naughty Dog have used a jungle environment in their latest games is because they want to create a similar environment to The Last of Us. A jungle serves this best as it can accommodate the mossy green-y urban environment that The Last of Us had. Same places in Libertalia (which have moss and fungi growing in urban environments) look like they were taken out of The Last of Us. The same is true for The Lost Legacy.

    They even reused that giraffe scene in The Lost Legacy. Except this time it's a baby elephant and after Chloe and Nadine bring it to its herd, they get over their differences with each other in a similar way to how Ellie finally opened up again to Joel after she patted the giraffe and saw it return to the other giraffes.

    Druckmann's classic the-parents-always-influence-the-child trait is also there. I don't know if you've noticed but Druckmann is obsessed with the idea of parents always influencing their children. He puts this in almost every story he writes. In The Last of Us, he did it with Joel and Ellie but he did the same thing in Uncharted 4 as well. Nate and Sam are influenced by their mother to be come adventurers. Rafe is trying to find treasure because he wants to prove that he's not just his parents' pet. Nadine has to put Shoreline back together after her father's risky investments. This explains why in The Lost Legacy, Chloe is going on and on about being influenced by a father she never mentioned in any of the previous games. Even the villain of The Lost Legacy is some guy who's trying to fulfill his ancestor's legacy.

    Finally Druckmann's strong female characters are also there. Druckmann said in an interview that one of the reasons why The Last of Us has so many bad ass female characters is because he wanted to be a role model to his daughter and not sexualise female characters like many other video game developers. I think that's why in Uncharted 4, Nadine is some overpowered woman who Nate can't beat no matter what he does. The Lost Legacy also has taken overpowered Nadine and cast her alongside Chloe to make a strong female combo. It's not really a surprise that they were made the protagonists considering Druckmann's obsession with making strong female characters in video games.

    Honestly I think the success of The Last of Us has influenced Naugty Dog the same way that the success of WoW influenced Blizzard. Blizzard can't make a game now without using WoW's cartoon-y graphics and cheesey dialogue. Similarly Naughty Dog can't make a game without inserting some of The Last of Us in it and it seems that Neil Druckmann is in charge of every project. This is one of the downsides of having a game be a massive success. It limits creativity.

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    The only one that comes to mind aside from Left Behind is Amy. Though one of them is a kid, not sure if that counts, it's basically a long escort mission in a zombie setting. It's not a very good game either.
    There aren't many games with multiple protagonists to begin with, I don't think females are being handwaved in this case.
    I'm not just referring to video games but any medium. Know any books, films, TV shows with female duo protagonists?

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    I don't expect anything groundbreaking but I hope it's not just an extra area with slightly different robots and side missions.
    It feels like all the good games have already come out for 2017. I don't think I'm waiting for anything other than maybe Shadow of War and Assassin's Creed Origins. What about you?

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    I think it's a big part of it, yeah. It got positive reviews, but it proved to be very divisive among the audience. I genuinely think a lot of reviewers only rated it so high because they thought the audience would universally like it, since it's the same as the original films everyone was gushing about. Turns out it's not that simple. Puts things into perspective. I didn't like it either. People can trash the prequels all they like, they were at least original stories. Funny that they got a newfound appreciation after EpVII's release.

    Rogue One is better, but at this point all I see is Disney's money-milking factory at work, not genuine interest in enriching this universe.
    Blade Runner 2049 got good reviews. Are you going to see it? I saw the original Blade Runner when I was in high school. I liked the ideas but overall I found the move to be quite boring. The ideas just weren't expressed in an interesting way. I hear Blade Runner 2049 is almost 3 hours long so it might have the same problem.

    Also Blade Runner 2049 has the same director as Arrival (2016), which I believe you said was your favourite movie last year? Maybe you'll find it has some similarities with Arrival.

    Also do you ever watch video essays on TV shows, movies? They've gotten quite popular in recent years, especially on YouTube. I've gotten into them a lot lately and sometimes I watch them more than video game analysis videos. Here's a video essay on Arrival (2016):

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QTxvzkwVsQE

    What do you think of it?

  32. #3152
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    A lighthouse in Budapest
    Posts
    2,286
    Quote Originally Posted by TSCR View Post
    Do you think Dragon Age is a bigger franchise than Mass Effect? I'm wondering if BioWare may do the same thing with the next Dragon Age game since they had to restructure the team for that as well.
    Mass Effect's fanbase was bigger, but I think Andromeda diminished that and the future of that series is uncertain now. Depending on the quality of the next Dragon Age game, I think it has the potential to permanently outgrow Mass Effect. It could also end up being a massive failure of course, that could put DA in the same limbo as ME, we'll see.

    But I think that may work against the fighting game in the long run. Having a well set method to play often means there isn't too much diversity in how to play. Do you know how big the current Injustice 2 pro scene is? Do you think it will last long?
    The NetherRealm games have an established pro scene by now. The current top Injustice players are roughly the same group who were top Mortal Kombat X players, with some bleeding over from the Tekken scene. These players have their own fanbase now, and the regularly held torunaments are good advertisements for NetherRealm. Diversity comes mainly from added DLC characters and patches, both of these can massively influence the status quo. A single nerf for Aquaman hugely affected the use of the character for example, leading to players picking different matchups when faced with certain character types, leading to differently paced matches.

    By the time they'll run out of DLCs and extended editions, Mortal Kombat 11 will already be ready to tag in. A few years after that there'll be another DC game, and the cycle continues. They have their business model already figured out, and it worked out well for NetherRealm so far. I say it's a win-win.

    Maybe she was just more concerned with rescuing the Little Sisters then she was with saving Jack? Jack did get saved from Ryan's self-destructing office by the Little Sisters right? Maybe it was the Little Sisters that finally caused her to consider Jack?
    She only considered Jack beacause of the Little Sisters in the first place. Most interactions between Jack and Tenenbaum revolve around them, including their very first meeting. It's the main reason why Tenenbaum monitors him throughout the game. No matter where or when you harvest your first Little Sister, she'll immediately flip out through the radio. If she cares about the Sisters' fate, she has to care about Jack, there's no going around it.

    So they did it in like a Middle Ages setting? Which stories are you referring to?
    The Name of the Wind for example is an "orphan kid enters magic school" sort of story in a more generic Middle Age-y fantasy world. At least two role-play adventure books have similar plots as well that I don't remember the titles of. There's also The Magicians (I think there's even a live action series about this one). Both Dragon Age and Elder Scrolls also have subplots involving magic schools.

    In a broader sense, even Star Wars can be considered similar. The Force is just space magic after all.

    Why don't you like the Tolkeinverse? Is it because of it's good vs. evil simplicity?
    It's part of it, yes. I like interesting villains, and Sauron is basically just a non-character who doesn't do anything at all. I liked Saruman's character quite a bit, but he doesn't have that big of a role either. The goodie side got all the attention, and that made it a bit boring for me.

    Also have you watched/read Game of Thrones? I don't know about the books but the show seems to be going downhill ever since they started writing their own material.
    I don't watch/read it. I intended to a while ago, but I was late to the party and the Internet ruined all the twists already, so I just never did. When the series is concluded and the hype dies down, I'll probably get to it one way or another.

    Honestly I think love is the most cliche thing in fiction and I think it's very difficult to write about it in a meaningful way. I think that's why a lot of writers blow love out of proportion and give it power that it doesn't really have.
    It's a convenient cop-out, yes. I'd be lying if I said I didn't like Disney movies, but that one can be blamed on them big time.

    I think Naughty Dog may be planning on starting a new Uncharted trio with Chloe, Nadine and Sam and may plan on bringing them together in later games.

    TBH I could see what Naughty Dog was trying to go for in The Lost Legacy but I don't think it worked out that well. The biggest problem is that they approached familiar characters from weird out-of-place angles and that makes it difficult for the audience to sympathise with them. It's not just Chloe who suffers from this, Nadine suffers as well.

    Later on in the game we find out that initially Chloe was working with Sam and after Sam got captured by the bad guy, Chloe got Nadine to help her because Nadine had some history with the bad guy. However Chloe knew about Nadine's history with Sam so she hid Sam's involvement with her until they found where Sam was being kept. Chloe wanted to rescue Sam but Nadine felt betrayed and got angry with Chloe.

    Naughty Dog tried to make this scene a tragic rift in friendship but it didn't really work. Honestly Nadine is no saint. She was working with Rafe who was the one that caused Sam to be stuck in jail for ages (by randomly killing the security guard). It made sense for Sam to fight off Nadine and her men. When Nadine gets angry at Chloe for Sam, I just can't sympathise with her. I mean we were killing her men and fighting her in Uncharted 4. Now I'm supposed to feel sorry for her losses? That's an odd demand for a story to make.
    The whole story went downhill for me by the end. I didn't feel Nadine was that out of character, but the whole situation just felt like a soap opera. They're trying to take themselves too seriously again, that's not at all what I'd like to see in an Uncharted game, but that's how things are now, it seems. I'm pretty convinved at this point that I'll never buy an Uncharted game again as long as it has Druckmann's fingerprints all over it.


    Because it wasn't headed by Scherr. This is a still from the credits:
    Well, that explains a lot of things. I was going off of Wikipedia that lists Scherr as the lead writer.

    About the reused assets and level design from TLOU, that doesn't bother me. It's just clever management of resources. What does bother me is the uniform stories and characters you talked about. I don't think it's only because of profits, I really think Druckmann is just incapable of doing anything else, but at the same time the studio doesn't want to risk trying new people. And as long as people eat it up it'll stay that way. I mean, badass female characters are great and all, but if it's too abundant it becomes just another distorted stereotype. I guess it's one less studio to keep an eye on in the narrative game field.

    I'm not just referring to video games but any medium. Know any books, films, TV shows with female duo protagonists?
    Not that many, actually. Which is a bit more odd than gaming, since those other mediums have been around so much longer. Most writers are still men and they just didn't try to approach a thing like that I guess, assuming that female friendships are just so much different than male ones. Which they aren't. It's a weird stereotype.

    There are things like Charlie's Angels and Powerpuff Girls (trios, but that's not much difference), but these aren't supposed to be relatable fiction so I wouldn't count them.

    One particular duo I'm fond of is Harley Quinn & Poison Ivy, from the Batman universe. The episode in the animated series where their friendship started (Episode 56) is the first one I've seen of the show as a kid and I immediately liked it. That episode is regularly counted in Top 10 lists of the show, exactly because depicting a relationship like that between these fleshed-out characters. The pairing proved to be so popular that it became a recurring element in the main comic continuity and spawned its own series, Gotham City Sirens, with Catwoman added as a third member (though she's a bit of a third wheel). It's a decent self-contained series and it will get a live action movie in the near future (the exact date is unclear, DC's schedule is a mess right now). I'm really looking forward to that. A big budget female buddy movie with superhero flavor (or supervillain in this case) could be something unique and refreshing. Provided they don't mess it up.

    It feels like all the good games have already come out for 2017. I don't think I'm waiting for anything other than maybe Shadow of War and Assassin's Creed Origins. What about you?
    We'll be playing Cuphead now in co-op, but after that, I don't plan to buy anything else. I'll see how Sonic Forces will turn out and maybe get it next year.

    Blade Runner 2049 got good reviews. Are you going to see it? I saw the original Blade Runner when I was in high school. I liked the ideas but overall I found the move to be quite boring. The ideas just weren't expressed in an interesting way. I hear Blade Runner 2049 is almost 3 hours long so it might have the same problem.

    Also Blade Runner 2049 has the same director as Arrival (2016), which I believe you said was your favourite movie last year? Maybe you'll find it has some similarities with Arrival.
    To be honest I've never seen Blade Runner and wasn't interested in the sequel either, but I didn't know it was directed by Villeneuve. It might just change my mind.

    Also do you ever watch video essays on TV shows, movies? They've gotten quite popular in recent years, especially on YouTube. I've gotten into them a lot lately and sometimes I watch them more than video game analysis videos. Here's a video essay on Arrival (2016):

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QTxvzkwVsQE

    What do you think of it?
    I've seen it, and it was very interesting. I've read the original story and I think all of the creative decisions in the movie improved on it. Which makes the adaptation actually superior to the source material. This surely doesn't happen often. Another example I can think of is The Man in the High Castle. The original book is a mess, based on a good idea. The Amazon series improves on every aspect of it, I'll glady watch an analysis about that one as well.

    Since we mentioned Star Wars before, I watched this analysis of it recently:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Z0S0Z8lUTg

    It's quite long, but I think it would be enjoyable to anyone interested in philosophy, even if they never heard about Star Wars before. It's viewing the Star Wars universe through the lens of the KotOR games, especially from the standpoint of Kreia, a character in the second game. The main writer of the game, and the writer of Kreia's character was Chris Avellone, the guy behind Planescape: Torment, so I think it could be interesting to you as well. I think KotOR 2 is a very underrated game, one of my favorites, and the points in this video are the reasons why. That's why it's especially disheartening to see Disney produce empty retreads like EpVII, while Star Wars could (and did) have this much depth in it.

  33. #3153
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,058
    @biccs_pudding

    Once again sorry for the late reply. I got busy with exams and all the games, movies etc that came out in the last month but I'm pretty free now.

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    Mass Effect's fanbase was bigger, but I think Andromeda diminished that and the future of that series is uncertain now. Depending on the quality of the next Dragon Age game, I think it has the potential to permanently outgrow Mass Effect. It could also end up being a massive failure of course, that could put DA in the same limbo as ME, we'll see.
    What are your views on BioWare's upcoming ARPG Anthem that's due to be released next year? Tbh I don't have high expectations of it. It looks like BioWare is trying to jump on the MMORPG bandwagon but don't want the narrative constraints that a MMORPG entails so they struck a compromise with the ARPG.

    I think you need a good writing team to make something like Anthem successful. I doubt BioWare would be able to create great multiplayer. Their strength has always been their stories. If that doesn't happen with Anthem then I don't see it succeeding.

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    She only considered Jack beacause of the Little Sisters in the first place. Most interactions between Jack and Tenenbaum revolve around them, including their very first meeting. It's the main reason why Tenenbaum monitors him throughout the game. No matter where or when you harvest your first Little Sister, she'll immediately flip out through the radio. If she cares about the Sisters' fate, she has to care about Jack, there's no going around it.
    True but I thought of another possibility.

    Maybe she wanted to remove the command phrase but she didn't get the opportunity until Jack became unconscious after falling down that Little Sister vent. I'm not sure if it's ever specified how exactly she removed the command phrase from Jack. I'm guessing she did some sort of surgery on him when he was unconscious. Assuming that this is the case then I think Tenenbaum was afraid that Fontaine would command Jack to attack her if she tried to help him earlier. I think Tenenbaum may have been waiting for some kind of opportunity where Jack was off-guard in order to remove the command phrase from him.

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    The whole story went downhill for me by the end. I didn't feel Nadine was that out of character, but the whole situation just felt like a soap opera. They're trying to take themselves too seriously again, that's not at all what I'd like to see in an Uncharted game, but that's how things are now, it seems. I'm pretty convinved at this point that I'll never buy an Uncharted game again as long as it has Druckmann's fingerprints all over it.
    I have a feeling Druckmann is going to be in-charge of story for all of Naughty Dog's games from now on. Naughty Dog may as well rename themselves 'Neil Druckmann'.

    BTW have you seen The Last of Us 2's second trailer:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UzdNECcio54

    It's kind of confusing since it doesn't feature Joel and Ellie. People have speculated that we're seeing a flashback and the buff lady is Ellie's mother.

    Do you think you'll get The Last of Us 2 or do you prefer to watch a Let's Play before buying it? It doesn't look too different from Druckmann's previous games (strong females, dark grounded world etc) so I think I'd prefer to watch a Let's Play before buying it.

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    Well, that explains a lot of things. I was going off of Wikipedia that lists Scherr as the lead writer.

    About the reused assets and level design from TLOU, that doesn't bother me. It's just clever management of resources.
    Why do you think it's clever management of resources? I think it's just lazy. The previous Uncharted games always focused on bringing some kind of innovative environmental effects. For UC1 it was water, for UC2 it was snow, for UC3 it was sand but in UC4 I don't think they bothered to add anything new. They just reused assets from TLOU. TLOU was innovative on how it used lighting with nature but seeing the same thing in UC4 (especially in Libertalia) just feels uninspired.

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    What does bother me is the uniform stories and characters you talked about. I don't think it's only because of profits, I really think Druckmann is just incapable of doing anything else, but at the same time the studio doesn't want to risk trying new people. And as long as people eat it up it'll stay that way. I mean, badass female characters are great and all, but if it's too abundant it becomes just another distorted stereotype. I guess it's one less studio to keep an eye on in the narrative game field.
    Judging by the trailer of The Last of Us 2, it looks like Druckmann is sticking to his formula of bad ass females.

    You're a female so I have to ask you: do you think most young girls like bad ass strong female characters that can beat up men? Druckmann said he wrote strong female characters into TLOU is because he wanted to inspire his 8 year old daughter. Do 8 year old girls really want to see characters like that?

    Tbh strong characters that can beat up everyone else sound more like something little boys would like. I sometimes wonder if Druckmann really understands what a typical 8 year old girl would want to see in a character or if just writes what he himself wanted to see in a character when

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    Not that many, actually. Which is a bit more odd than gaming, since those other mediums have been around so much longer. Most writers are still men and they just didn't try to approach a thing like that I guess, assuming that female friendships are just so much different than male ones. Which they aren't. It's a weird stereotype.

    There are things like Charlie's Angels and Powerpuff Girls (trios, but that's not much difference), but these aren't supposed to be relatable fiction so I wouldn't count them.

    One particular duo I'm fond of is Harley Quinn & Poison Ivy, from the Batman universe. The episode in the animated series where their friendship started (Episode 56) is the first one I've seen of the show as a kid and I immediately liked it. That episode is regularly counted in Top 10 lists of the show, exactly because depicting a relationship like that between these fleshed-out characters. The pairing proved to be so popular that it became a recurring element in the main comic continuity and spawned its own series, Gotham City Sirens, with Catwoman added as a third member (though she's a bit of a third wheel). It's a decent self-contained series and it will get a live action movie in the near future (the exact date is unclear, DC's schedule is a mess right now). I'm really looking forward to that. A big budget female buddy movie with superhero flavor (or supervillain in this case) could be something unique and refreshing. Provided they don't mess it up.
    With the disappointing performance of Justice League, do you have anymore hope in DC lol?

    Tbh I can kind of understand DC's perspective in rushing out a Justice League film. There's this idea in the film industry that all genres, no matter how popular, will eventually get fatigued. This happened to cowboy films, pirates films (until Pirates of the Carribean revived interest) etc.

    I think the reason why DC rushed out a Justice League film without setting up all the characters is because they were afraid by the time they did that, the superhero film craze would be gone. I think DC's plan may have succeeded if they were very careful but they weren't. I think trusting Snyder was a bad idea because all his films received mix reviews at most and Batman v Superman under-performed financially.

    It looks like DC is going to lose a lot of money on Justice league as well. It cost $300 million, making it a film with one of the highest budgets but it doesn't look like it will gross over a billion.

    I think DC's best option is to play it safe now. Forget about making big bucks asap and focus on each individual hero. Wonder Woman was well received so I think there is hope but I think DC should forget about competing with Marvel. They should go for a modest profit.

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    To be honest I've never seen Blade Runner and wasn't interested in the sequel either, but I didn't know it was directed by Villeneuve. It might just change my mind.
    Have you 2017 Murder on the Orient Express film? I was surprised by how it was fairly loyal to the novel. They made a few changes for dramatic effect but the basic plot was the same. For once, Hollywood didn't mess up the story although Poirot's moustauch still annoys me.

    Also it looks like they're planning on making sequels (the end scene hinted the next movie would be Death on the Nile). I don't mind if they continue as long as they stay faithful to the novel. I hope they eventually make a faithful adaption of The Murder of Roger Ackroyd.

    Also have you read Crooked House? It's one of Christie's non-famous detective stories. It also got a film that came out around last month. I haven't seen it yet but I'm hoping to soon.

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    I've seen it, and it was very interesting. I've read the original story and I think all of the creative decisions in the movie improved on it. Which makes the adaptation actually superior to the source material. This surely doesn't happen often. Another example I can think of is The Man in the High Castle. The original book is a mess, based on a good idea. The Amazon series improves on every aspect of it, I'll gladly watch an analysis about that one as well.
    Have you read Lord of the Rings? I think the films did a better job of telling the story than the books did. The book had a lot of stuff that I would categorise as filler and insignificant to the story.

    Quote Originally Posted by biccs_pudding View Post
    Since we mentioned Star Wars before, I watched this analysis of it recently:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Z0S0Z8lUTg

    It's quite long, but I think it would be enjoyable to anyone interested in philosophy, even if they never heard about Star Wars before. It's viewing the Star Wars universe through the lens of the KotOR games, especially from the standpoint of Kreia, a character in the second game. The main writer of the game, and the writer of Kreia's character was Chris Avellone, the guy behind Planescape: Torment, so I think it could be interesting to you as well. I think KotOR 2 is a very underrated game, one of my favorites, and the points in this video are the reasons why. That's why it's especially disheartening to see Disney produce empty retreads like EpVII, while Star Wars could (and did) have this much depth in it.
    That analysis was interesting but I doubt we'll ever see something like this on-screen. I don't know why but for some reason the Star Wars games, books etc tend to have more depth and nuance than the films that tend to be fairly simplistic. Maybe it's just because they want to appeal to a wider audience?

    Seen the trailer for The Last Jedi? It doesn't look like they're going to do much in terms of complexity in it. It kind of looks like The Empire Strikes Back to me in terms of tone. Looks like they're trying to make it darker. Also the trailer makes it looks like they plan to kill Leia off which may be a possibility since Carrie Fisher died last year and they've already said they don't plan on bringing Leia into Episode 9.

  34. #3154
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    A lighthouse in Budapest
    Posts
    2,286
    Quote Originally Posted by TSCR View Post
    [
    What are your views on BioWare's upcoming ARPG Anthem that's due to be released next year? Tbh I don't have high expectations of it. It looks like BioWare is trying to jump on the MMORPG bandwagon but don't want the narrative constraints that a MMORPG entails so they struck a compromise with the ARPG.
    It looks little more than a Destiny clone, getting in on the cash grab trends. BioWare's storytelling made SWTOR bearable for me for a while but the MMO environment just can't support any kind of cohesive narrative. I don't expect Anthem to be different so I'm not interested.

    Maybe she wanted to remove the command phrase but she didn't get the opportunity until Jack became unconscious after falling down that Little Sister vent. I'm not sure if it's ever specified how exactly she removed the command phrase from Jack. I'm guessing she did some sort of surgery on him when he was unconscious. Assuming that this is the case then I think Tenenbaum was afraid that Fontaine would command Jack to attack her if she tried to help him earlier. I think Tenenbaum may have been waiting for some kind of opportunity where Jack was off-guard in order to remove the command phrase from him.
    There's no reason Tenenbaum couldn't have explained the situation to Jack if she wanted, but plenty of reasons she should have. Fontaine can't hear what Tenenbaum tells Jack on another frequency of the same radio. There's no indication that he's been wired (there was no opportunity for that and he doesn't talk anyway). Fontaine is genuinely surprised that the WYK conditioning was removed, despite Tenenbaum explaining it to Jack face to face.

    BTW have you seen The Last of Us 2's second trailer:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UzdNECcio54

    It's kind of confusing since it doesn't feature Joel and Ellie. People have speculated that we're seeing a flashback and the buff lady is Ellie's mother.
    If it's Ellie's mom it would have to be a prequel game, since she is long dead by the time of TLOU proper. The reveal trailer featured a grown Ellie, who would be a more probable protagonist. But since it's hinted that the buffed woman "sinned", is probably pregnant, and doesn't look dissimilar to Ellie, my guess is that she is indeed the mom, we play as her in the prologue, and then jump forward in time to Ellie shortly after. It's the same structure as the first game. The main story will probably feature this turbo-Christian death cult in some way, because this surely hasn't been done to death already.

    Do you think you'll get The Last of Us 2 or do you prefer to watch a Let's Play before buying it? It doesn't look too different from Druckmann's previous games (strong females, dark grounded world etc) so I think I'd prefer to watch a Let's Play before buying it.
    Let's Play for me as well. It didn't show anything of interest yet.

    Why do you think it's clever management of resources? I think it's just lazy. The previous Uncharted games always focused on bringing some kind of innovative environmental effects. For UC1 it was water, for UC2 it was snow, for UC3 it was sand but in UC4 I don't think they bothered to add anything new. They just reused assets from TLOU. TLOU was innovative on how it used lighting with nature but seeing the same thing in UC4 (especially in Libertalia) just feels uninspired.
    Well, if you have a few levels that could be padded out with old assets, it frees a lot of time for the art team to focus on new ones. Like the crazy detailed interior of that Italian palace, or Nadine's hair. I'm currently on my way into the CGI industry and I can safely tell that Nadine's hair is a technological marvel in itself (there's a reason she has a lot more manageable hairstyle in Lost Legacy, an afro would be a nightmare to manage for that much screentime). There's also the mud and the lighting on Madagascar when it gets cloudy, which looks so real it's scary. These things require a ton of work, nothing in TLOU comes close to it, and TLOU is not ugly to begin with. I give UC4 a lot of crap, but I was dazzled by the graphics, no question.

    You're a female so I have to ask you: do you think most young girls like bad ass strong female characters that can beat up men? Druckmann said he wrote strong female characters into TLOU is because he wanted to inspire his 8 year old daughter. Do 8 year old girls really want to see characters like that?
    Good question. A lot depends on the cultural environment. The percentage of young girls who are into that is greatly influenced by how conservative or progressive their society is about gender roles, I think. I doubt there are even reliable statistics about that. I know I had a very hard time being a "not-girly" girl for prefering toys and media marketed for boys instead of Barbie dolls and My Little Pony, and for fighting a lot. I was often called a "closet lesbian", a "fake girl" or even "mentally ill", not just by children. I'm not the type of person to be influenced by all that, but a lot of more sensitive girls in the same shoes would rather bend over backwards than be social outcasts. I have no doubt that there are/were a lot of girls like that around me at any given time, but I have no way of knowing how many.

    Times are changing for the better though. When the first Tomb Raider movie was in theaters, I was one of maybe 5 females in the whole room. When Mad Max: Fury Road came, a good third of the viewers were women, and it was not a stigma to like a character like Furiosa anymore.

    Tbh strong characters that can beat up everyone else sound more like something little boys would like. I sometimes wonder if Druckmann really understands what a typical 8 year old girl would want to see in a character or if just writes what he himself wanted to see in a character when
    There's a famous example with the creation of the Wonder Woman comics back in the 40s. It originally intended to get young girls into reading comics, but its audience still turned out overwhelmingly to be teenage boys. The invisible pastry cutter that girls got hammered into from a very young age, but was ignored until very recently, has a lot to do with that. Look at Wonder Woman today though. The majority of the theater I watched it in were the same teenage girls you would normally see on a shopping spree in a random strip mall, and they were auidibly enjoying themselves.

    Hollywood and the game industry is catching up on the social trends, and are still experimenting. Looking at the success of the Wonder Woman movie with female audiences, I think they figured it out. The confident hardass archetype who is portrayed as more "masculine" (that's the Sarah Connor/Furiosa/Ellen Ripley type) will be successful with a minority of openly "masculine" women like me, but wouldn't appeal to girls who grew up surrounded by Disney Princess merchandise. Wonder Woman seems to be the perfect blend to maximize that appeal, by making her about traditionally "feminine" traits like nurture and compassion, as well as power and agency. Two birds with one stone. In future games and movies I expect fewer Ellies and more Aloys.

    TL;DR: If Druckmann wants to catch the attention of as many girls as possible, the masculine approach is not the way. The important thing is the variety. Masculine characters are fine, but not at the expense of feminine ones. The strength of Ellie's character shouldn't invalidate Cinderella's. There's an overlapping market for both that he doesn't seem to recognize.

    With the disappointing performance of Justice League, do you have anymore hope in DC lol?
    I do, actually. They are just rushing everything, but with more level-headed creators I think they could do great things. I'm getting tired of Marvel's one-size-fits-all monster of a movieverse, so I'd be glad if DC would stop trying to copy them and do their own thing instead. I think Man of Steel and Suicide Squad were great concepts that failed at the execution. With better management they could be great.

    I think the reason why DC rushed out a Justice League film without setting up all the characters is because they were afraid by the time they did that, the superhero film craze would be gone. I think DC's plan may have succeeded if they were very careful but they weren't. I think trusting Snyder was a bad idea because all his films received mix reviews at most and Batman v Superman under-performed financially.
    Haven't seen JL yet, but I wish they would stop forcing these big team-ups. I think DC characters work a lot better individually or at least in smaller groups, otherwise the plot gets dwarfed by a big blob of exposition. Snyder should be put in a consulting role, and should not direct. He really is a financial risk. With the recent drama in his life, he might even agree.
    About the superhero fatigue, I don't think that's what's worrying them. They just want all the money that Marvel gets but without the effort. Good old greed.

    I think DC's best option is to play it safe now. Forget about making big bucks asap and focus on each individual hero. Wonder Woman was well received so I think there is hope but I think DC should forget about competing with Marvel. They should go for a modest profit.
    I couldn't agree more. Still, it's a billion dollar megacompany we're talking about so I'm not betting on them being modest.

    Have you 2017 Murder on the Orient Express film? I was surprised by how it was fairly loyal to the novel. They made a few changes for dramatic effect but the basic plot was the same. For once, Hollywood didn't mess up the story although Poirot's moustauch still annoys me.
    I was pleasantly surprised. I was afraid all the top actors will overplay their roles but I liked everyone minus Poirot. Mustache aside, I think Branagh is a good drama director but not a great actor, especially with a difficult character like this. He was decent in the first half of the movie, but in the confrontation scenes he's way too emotional. Overall I enjoyed it. One particular change I didn't like was that Poirot was already approached by Armstrong shortly before the movie's events. The plot already has an abundance of curious coincidences, that just felt like one too many.

    Also it looks like they're planning on making sequels (the end scene hinted the next movie would be Death on the Nile). I don't mind if they continue as long as they stay faithful to the novel. I hope they eventually make a faithful adaption of The Murder of Roger Ackroyd.
    I'd like a similar adaptation of Death on the Nile, and wouldn't mind Ackroyd either. I like the tone of this better than the old versions. It's a bit less dry.

    Also have you read Crooked House? It's one of Christie's non-famous detective stories. It also got a film that came out around last month. I haven't seen it yet but I'm hoping to soon.
    Not familiar with that one but I'll look it up.

    Have you read Lord of the Rings? I think the films did a better job of telling the story than the books did. The book had a lot of stuff that I would categorise as filler and insignificant to the story.
    I only read the Hobbit. The trilogy's length was too intimidating for my mild interest, and since everyone said the movies were good adaptations I never bothered. The first LOTR version I've seen was that British animated movie which wasn't bad, but the modern movies were leagues better. Strange that the weakest episode got the most Oscars though.

    That analysis was interesting but I doubt we'll ever see something like this on-screen. I don't know why but for some reason the Star Wars games, books etc tend to have more depth and nuance than the films that tend to be fairly simplistic. Maybe it's just because they want to appeal to a wider audience?
    Yeah, I think that's it. I still remember the uproar when the prequels dared to incorporate politics instead of more nostalgia bits. In games this doesn't seem to be the problem, as their audience tend to be older and more educated.

    Seen the trailer for The Last Jedi? It doesn't look like they're going to do much in terms of complexity in it. It kind of looks like The Empire Strikes Back to me in terms of tone. Looks like they're trying to make it darker. Also the trailer makes it looks like they plan to kill Leia off which may be a possibility since Carrie Fisher died last year and they've already said they don't plan on bringing Leia into Episode 9.
    It's hard to be invested in it when the last movie couldn't provide anything new I cared about, while twisted the old things I did care about. Judging by the trailer this one won't sway me either. I wonder how much of it they had to rewrite because of Fisher, I'll be curious of the original storyline if it ever gets published. But I'd be most curious about Lucas' original ideas, even if Disney would never let him talk about that.


    Have you played/seen The Frozen Wilds DLC for Zero Dawn? I think it was worth the money. Not a full-fledged new storyline as I hoped, but it had nice additions to the lore and some interesting side quests with the best snow I've seen in a game yet.

Page 79 of 79 FirstFirst ... 2969777879

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •